Skip Ribbon Commands
Skip to main content
Sign In
An Official Site ofOhio.gov

Design Comments

1. Username: (this must match your previously submitted username in order for your response to be considered)

 kraig
 1 (0%)  
 jackmalone2001
 1 (0%)  
 johnnyone
 1 (0%)  
 cgotwald
 1 (0%)  
 marc1590
 1 (0%)  
 KareBear
 1 (0%)  
 noah424
 1 (0%)  
 epathfinder
 1 (0%)  
 mlbscouting
 1 (0%)  
 bridgethegap
 2 (0%)  
 ktillman0
 1 (0%)  
 M.D.
 1 (0%)  
 xodrummer
 1 (0%)  
 murraal
 1 (0%)  
 newbridge
 1 (0%)  
 cleveIrsish
 1 (0%)  
 DReinhart
 1 (0%)  
 ExClevelander_13
 1 (0%)  
 MJ
 1 (0%)  
 MickeyG
 1 (0%)  
 D19671L
 1 (0%)  
 smharasimchuk
 1 (0%)  
 bikegriffith
 1 (0%)  
 jsalamon
 1 (0%)  
 Milkman
 1 (0%)  
 saywhatmachine
 1 (0%)  
 sram2342
 1 (0%)  
 uastudent12
 1 (0%)  
 eagle12
 1 (0%)  
 cmac
 1 (0%)  
 jp
 1 (0%)  
 Hawgwild
 1 (0%)  
 NetTech722
 1 (0%)  
 rjmonhart
 1 (0%)  
 Leslie69
 1 (0%)  
 cleveland1
 1 (0%)  
 davart
 1 (0%)  
 BarneyBP
 1 (0%)  
 DocWhite01
 1 (0%)  
 ana
 1 (0%)  
 damelaneff
 1 (0%)  
 aknowsq
 1 (0%)  
 ClevelandJoe
 1 (0%)  
 ehudak
 1 (0%)  
 mrsturtz
 1 (0%)  
 Mike10284
 1 (0%)  
 hornet2433
 1 (0%)  
 Chumad
 1 (0%)  
 JulieKField
 1 (0%)  
 JerryP
 1 (0%)  
 lturchik
 1 (0%)  
 spatty43
 1 (0%)  
 ehodder
 1 (0%)  
 OldBlue
 1 (0%)  
 AUSTRAILIA123
 1 (0%)  
 johnohio
 1 (0%)  
 kbodnar
 1 (0%)  
 baxter1997
 1 (0%)  
 eagle7374
 1 (0%)  
 spateric
 1 (0%)  
 Howard
 1 (0%)  
 oldyeller33
 1 (0%)  
 joann.fre@dfas.mil
 1 (0%)  
 dawalton
 1 (0%)  
 Ginnovate
 1 (0%)  
 redbeard1969
 1 (0%)  
 kgordon
 1 (0%)  
 juberoos
 1 (0%)  
 Russman
 1 (0%)  
 leelan
 1 (0%)  
 tmmckenney
 1 (0%)  
 mspronz
 1 (0%)  
 zeeman
 1 (0%)  
 dansix
 1 (0%)  
 Badmonkey
 1 (0%)  
 twoolagh
 1 (0%)  
 Bob D
 1 (0%)  
 JMS
 1 (0%)  
 vbgirl
 1 (0%)  
 jminnick94@yahoo.com
 1 (0%)  
 jam215
 1 (0%)  
 Counselor
 1 (0%)  
 OHboy
 1 (0%)  
 MrDante
 1 (0%)  
 mmaster2
 1 (0%)  
 DowntownWorker
 1 (0%)  
 neoguy
 1 (0%)  
 dwirthwein
 1 (0%)  
 lovie2010
 1 (0%)  
 edwinrm
 1 (0%)  
 workoficiton
 1 (0%)  
 rickhaire
 1 (0%)  
 tmichelle
 1 (0%)  
 ogibbigo
 1 (0%)  
 jhowe@pjdick.com
 1 (0%)  
 LauraB
 1 (0%)  
 static2606
 1 (0%)  
 Edward440
 1 (0%)  
 loraingirl
 1 (0%)  
 bjordan
 1 (0%)  
 Esuvee
 1 (0%)  
 Build it!!
 1 (0%)  
 leasalem
 2 (0%)  
 zombiewoman67
 1 (0%)  
 dmfox0000
 1 (0%)  
 mpecot
 1 (0%)  
 J95wahoo
 1 (0%)  
 Jb
 1 (0%)  
 AerialAspect
 1 (0%)  
 fanofcleveland
 1 (0%)  
 spfowler
 1 (0%)  
 chrisa
 1 (0%)  
 xrez033
 1 (0%)  
 Mark
 2 (0%)  
 billcisz
 1 (0%)  
 rsaIllini12
 1 (0%)  
 mrbrntly
 1 (0%)  
 CLEsprts10
 1 (0%)  
 jvitou
 1 (0%)  
 tmc24
 1 (0%)  
 snowboarder8462
 1 (0%)  
 alchemist
 1 (0%)  
 pioneer162
 1 (0%)  
 brooker920
 1 (0%)  
 ser73084
 1 (0%)  
 Enchantress2614
 1 (0%)  
 godoc
 1 (0%)  
 Matt
 1 (0%)  
 jronosky
 1 (0%)  
 rm
 1 (0%)  
 jar5400
 1 (0%)  
 bossman
 1 (0%)  
 deltachaz
 1 (0%)  
 AngelicaK
 1 (0%)  
 Dave
 3 (0%)  
 tkunsman
 1 (0%)  
 Clooney
 1 (0%)  
 lmulloy
 1 (0%)  
 schudome13
 1 (0%)  
 sjlarson
 1 (0%)  
 AdkinsD
 1 (0%)  
 tglassman
 1 (0%)  
 ajtipdebby
 1 (0%)  
 mike_n_cleveland
 1 (0%)  
 Mikolic.2
 1 (0%)  
 B2
 1 (0%)  
 dwvisio
 1 (0%)  
 Foraker
 1 (0%)  
 spatena
 1 (0%)  
 ohiodiane
 1 (0%)  
 graybee85
 1 (0%)  
 JTressel
 1 (0%)  
 Randy
 1 (0%)  
 DarkKnight2001
 1 (0%)  
 fsnuffer
 1 (0%)  
 rachelecleve
 1 (0%)  
 cleveland612
 1 (0%)  
 bachiebunny
 1 (0%)  
 New2Cleveland
 1 (0%)  
 kelewicki
 1 (0%)  
 halomez
 1 (0%)  
 bridgeguy
 2 (0%)  
 suzie
 1 (0%)  
 gsant
 1 (0%)  
 bfog
 1 (0%)  
 zotay
 1 (0%)  
 ceagle
 1 (0%)  
 scelyria
 1 (0%)  
 wiseguy
 1 (0%)  
 jw101972
 1 (0%)  
 zoom500
 1 (0%)  
 clevelandcc
 1 (0%)  
 beckycor
 1 (0%)  
 JoeG2001
 1 (0%)  
 sfixx
 1 (0%)  
 TGregory
 1 (0%)  
 bridgebuilder
 1 (0%)  
 Stephanie
 1 (0%)  
 tdudley08@att.net
 1 (0%)  
 BridgeCfan
 1 (0%)  
 Sharonsays
 1 (0%)  
 tjhul
 1 (0%)  
 win w
 1 (0%)  
 clevelandfan
 1 (0%)  
 rtokars
 1 (0%)  
 dhickey
 1 (0%)  
 syl13mec
 1 (0%)  
 agotscha
 1 (0%)  
 pchak
 1 (0%)  
 jhunley
 1 (0%)  
 cmdanzey
 1 (0%)  
 bridgecrosser
 1 (0%)  
 ajport
 1 (0%)  
 vice65
 1 (0%)  
 migama
 1 (0%)  
 mnovak
 1 (0%)  
 Darlene
 1 (0%)  
 rclark
 1 (0%)  
 kozmo
 1 (0%)  
 rcringwall
 1 (0%)  
 szafman
 1 (0%)  
 dmitalski
 1 (0%)  
 john1987
 1 (0%)  
 jburchaski
 1 (0%)  
 stohcms
 1 (0%)  
 neno85
 1 (0%)  
 pbill
 1 (0%)  
 ireschke@aol.com
 1 (0%)  
 DGrossman
 1 (0%)  
 boufa
 1 (0%)  
 caseyhydo
 1 (0%)  
 northcoast
 1 (0%)  
 amsteele
 1 (0%)  
 JBar
 1 (0%)  
 MarkCat
 1 (0%)  
 parsonparsons
 1 (0%)  
 yaHeardme19
 1 (0%)  
 Noplacelikehome
 1 (0%)  
 Clevelandchick
 1 (0%)  
 zwaite87
 1 (0%)  
 mmetcalf
 1 (0%)  
 mbigler14
 1 (0%)  
 HITEK1936
 1 (0%)  
 rsr23
 1 (0%)  
 Dawgss69
 1 (0%)  
 jongra
 1 (0%)  
 armconsulting
 1 (0%)  
 IMEmperor
 1 (0%)  
 CelloBee
 1 (0%)  
 quartermane
 1 (0%)  
 Muneca
 1 (0%)  
 tjc1773
 1 (0%)  
 nbrewer
 1 (0%)  
 samboyer
 1 (0%)  
 ml
 1 (0%)  
 bobm
 1 (0%)  
 Mrsstanford
 1 (0%)  
 clevelandcarole
 1 (0%)  
 chrisazimmer
 1 (0%)  
 tokrez
 1 (0%)  
 Jill
 1 (0%)  
 heightsfan
 1 (0%)  
 stu24
 1 (0%)  
 apple7777443
 1 (0%)  
 clevegirl22
 1 (0%)  
 Phiero
 1 (0%)  
 Ellen197
 1 (0%)  
 lmilks
 1 (0%)  
 mkstallard
 1 (0%)  
 susie
 1 (0%)  
 mabaker
 1 (0%)  
 smbren
 1 (0%)  
 juansmommy
 1 (0%)  
 gaadler
 1 (0%)  
 elmarco
 1 (0%)  
 sojourner42
 1 (0%)  
 tweetels
 1 (0%)  
 sbriggs
 1 (0%)  
 ltschmitz
 1 (0%)  
 Bikeman
 1 (0%)  
 Bearcats31
 1 (0%)  
 Ceci
 1 (0%)  
 campfiregirl777
 1 (0%)  
 Whiz
 1 (0%)  
 jack wheeler
 1 (0%)  
 Bay Village Guy
 1 (0%)  
 sksif
 1 (0%)  
 Nancy
 1 (0%)  
 Bayernbuckeye
 1 (0%)  
 Beauty
 1 (0%)  
 Lauron
 1 (0%)  
 samiam
 1 (0%)  
 drayneal
 1 (0%)  
 ezbill
 1 (0%)  
 Phish69
 1 (0%)  
 MacedoniaOH
 1 (0%)  
 oallos1
 1 (0%)  
 DrTerri
 1 (0%)  
 FLHTCU
 1 (0%)  
 mgaebelein
 1 (0%)  
 lionheart_874
 1 (0%)  
 jeremyck01
 1 (0%)  
 BRATT
 1 (0%)  
 jwoody92
 1 (0%)  
 happy
 1 (0%)  
 jmbud
 1 (0%)  
 coasterfreaksp
 1 (0%)  
 klausy
 1 (0%)  
 lak669
 1 (0%)  
 austin
 1 (0%)  
 CharPach
 1 (0%)  
 collisionbend
 1 (0%)  
 Savana56
 1 (0%)  
 capedory
 1 (0%)  
 zip
 1 (0%)  
 natureguystudio
 1 (0%)  
 slee
 1 (0%)  
 bobbyd575
 1 (0%)  
 Heidi
 1 (0%)  
 charlie9059
 1 (0%)  
 youngone99
 1 (0%)  
 Jupiter10
 1 (0%)  
 rsojka
 1 (0%)  
 clgal
 1 (0%)  
 jshd06
 1 (0%)  
 rawcat
 1 (0%)  
 shakadriver26
 1 (0%)  
 grottmann
 1 (0%)  
 ldingman1@cox.net
 1 (0%)  
 ClevelandGurl84
 1 (0%)  
 ntysolon
 1 (0%)  
 fordmodel26
 1 (0%)  
 krivka
 1 (0%)  
 kwakers22
 1 (0%)  
 TONY
 1 (0%)  
 vickie_v
 1 (0%)  
 weaver
 1 (0%)  
 ltd4all
 1 (0%)  
 bpeterson9
 1 (0%)  
 ulydawg
 1 (0%)  
 cgard79
 1 (0%)  
 joenieber
 1 (0%)  
 bebe4ev4
 1 (0%)  
 jevans.900
 1 (0%)  
 exsmokerme
 1 (0%)  
 paulclevo
 1 (0%)  
 adr3na1inerush
 1 (0%)  
 Dan
 1 (0%)  
 dmorr
 1 (0%)  
 Eddie69
 1 (0%)  
 cars121
 1 (0%)  
 Libby61
 1 (0%)  
 tablegrapes
 1 (0%)  
 mk107308
 1 (0%)  
 KennethN
 1 (0%)  
 Bmusic1
 1 (0%)  
 Godfather_II
 1 (0%)  
 zoealex
 1 (0%)  
 markh
 1 (0%)  
 myaluiza
 1 (0%)  
 JohnGerst
 1 (0%)  
  Strongsville
 1 (0%)  
 lildreamer_dg
 1 (0%)  
 SBocan
 1 (0%)  
 LaraP
 1 (0%)  
 mdleese
 1 (0%)  
 morlinelv
 1 (0%)  
 949699champs
 1 (0%)  
 mbig0100
 1 (0%)  
 duffey3
 1 (0%)  
 cmc
 1 (0%)  
 schweb
 1 (0%)  
 plm02
 1 (0%)  
 ak
 1 (0%)  
 dominic
 1 (0%)  
 visualplanner
 1 (0%)  
 DaK0722
 1 (0%)  
 Basil421
 1 (0%)  
 acgercak
 1 (0%)  
 hmay526
 1 (0%)  
 mhl
 1 (0%)  
 tbone1229
 1 (0%)  
 rpireaux
 1 (0%)  
 ksc8850
 1 (0%)  
 reneebill
 1 (0%)  
 pcdes2@roadrunner.com
 1 (0%)  
 rbain
 1 (0%)  
 streamerhead
 2 (0%)  
 JimSaid
 1 (0%)  
 agustav
 1 (0%)  
 stevecouch
 1 (0%)  
 jagwill
 1 (0%)  
 pele10
 1 (0%)  
 mark
 1 (0%)  
 skoza
 1 (0%)  
 carpool
 1 (0%)  
 djbobo
 1 (0%)  
 Verona
 1 (0%)  
 jbsball01
 1 (0%)  
 timthepainter
 1 (0%)  
 photogal71
 1 (0%)  
 mschin47
 1 (0%)  
 DSOM63
 1 (0%)  
 mfmsc
 1 (0%)  
 johnjjr3795
 1 (0%)  
 keyper2
 1 (0%)  
 markso102
 1 (0%)  
 Mark Fraunfelder
 1 (0%)  
 cb1
 1 (0%)  
 cjp
 1 (0%)  
 perry
 1 (0%)  
 glekutis
 1 (0%)  
 westside
 1 (0%)  
 cjs1north
 1 (0%)  
 ocalhoun
 1 (0%)  
 Ed
 1 (0%)  
 trish47
 1 (0%)  
 Kataleah
 1 (0%)  
 theawesome1
 1 (0%)  
 DaleSmith4District7
 1 (0%)  
 dtavoletti
 1 (0%)  
 positive attractions
 1 (0%)  
 tvah
 1 (0%)  
 twintakarai
 1 (0%)  
 Sanctus
 1 (0%)  
 esc123
 1 (0%)  
 me
 2 (0%)  
 Dsolecki
 1 (0%)  
 vodeezie
 1 (0%)  
 cle_born
 1 (0%)  
 golfron
 1 (0%)  
 genearters44202
 1 (0%)  
 rigg47
 1 (0%)  
 ta6289
 1 (0%)  
 acampo22
 1 (0%)  
 penny
 1 (0%)  
 johnnyp
 1 (0%)  
 cg
 1 (0%)  
 44139
 1 (0%)  
 bridgereview
 1 (0%)  
 tomberger
 1 (0%)  
 tbshep
 1 (0%)  
 DanWentworth
 1 (0%)  
 kymba
 1 (0%)  
 aebleskivers
 1 (0%)  
 bobinbay
 1 (0%)  
 markaw3
 1 (0%)  
 cidne
 1 (0%)  
 grandkids
 1 (0%)  
 goblue
 1 (0%)  
 bronco88
 1 (0%)  
 clevorules
 1 (0%)  
 Mike
 1 (0%)  
 bmf18
 1 (0%)  
 Ron V
 1 (0%)  
 nasht38
 1 (0%)  
 islalala
 1 (0%)  
 DaveDawg330
 1 (0%)  
 jraszka
 1 (0%)  
 TremontGuy
 1 (0%)  
 pmgartrell
 1 (0%)  
 mkoch227
 1 (0%)  
 LouannO
 1 (0%)  
 cavsfan77
 2 (0%)  
 Georgiana Bencin
 1 (0%)  
 busdriver
 1 (0%)  
 Melt Bar and Grilled
 1 (0%)  
 smbajak
 1 (0%)  
 arc
 1 (0%)  
 mbajak84
 1 (0%)  
 rdiedrick
 1 (0%)  
 jdavis11
 1 (0%)  
 ehayes
 1 (0%)  
 blindmoose2020
 1 (0%)  
 tlazar39
 1 (0%)  
 jafish07
 1 (0%)  
 Gabby
 1 (0%)  
 kathyh
 1 (0%)  
 fish44256
 1 (0%)  
 luvnmom1020
 1 (0%)  
 dmast
 1 (0%)  
 mdg57
 1 (0%)  
 cndkid02
 1 (0%)  
 huddy511
 1 (0%)  
 amcalhoun
 1 (0%)  
 ds44111
 1 (0%)  
 rwatters
 1 (0%)  
 Pjam
 1 (0%)  
 LindaE
 1 (0%)  
 swannsong
 1 (0%)  
 michaelwk
 1 (0%)  
 popcornrox
 1 (0%)  
 Jerry
 1 (0%)  
 dann
 1 (0%)  
 foxsyma
 1 (0%)  
 Thiteral
 1 (0%)  
 whimsy47
 1 (0%)  
 jim
 1 (0%)  
 pozypusher@cox.net
 1 (0%)  
 Danny
 1 (0%)  
 Sammy
 1 (0%)  
 lindastone
 1 (0%)  
 sharonb
 1 (0%)  
 babybear
 1 (0%)  
 Rob G
 1 (0%)  
 Kittycarlson
 1 (0%)  
 cathyh
 1 (0%)  
 Zungen
 1 (0%)  
 vnRock
 1 (0%)  
 jjmazur
 1 (0%)  
 cwru126student
 1 (0%)  
 nathandorow25
 1 (0%)  
 karu
 1 (0%)  
 janie
 1 (0%)  
 kugen
 1 (0%)  
 zeemannz
 1 (0%)  
 reginasamuels
 1 (0%)  
 buff723
 1 (0%)  
 mrtuker1051
 1 (0%)  
 Jodes357
 1 (0%)  
 jabs1923
 1 (0%)  
 runawawme
 1 (0%)  
 mcneima
 1 (0%)  
 kmb45
 1 (0%)  
 Mbickett
 1 (0%)  
 Stevo
 1 (0%)  
 noraee
 1 (0%)  
 chopchop
 1 (0%)  
 MarcusG67
 1 (0%)  
 why
 1 (0%)  
 ladystar317
 1 (0%)  
 kelchoo9
 1 (0%)  
 critter
 1 (0%)  
 Thistle
 1 (0%)  
 njkr
 1 (0%)  
 flygirl
 1 (0%)  
 Arlene
 1 (0%)  
 billyanurse
 1 (0%)  
 jester99da
 1 (0%)  
 slkohio
 1 (0%)  
 yosteve
 1 (0%)  
 14today
 1 (0%)  
 MisterRev
 1 (0%)  
 2doorpost
 1 (0%)  
 paulkopin
 1 (0%)  
 g-mann
 1 (0%)  
 dlp
 1 (0%)  
 littlewheezer
 1 (0%)  
 asharma7467
 1 (0%)  
 Wm10e
 1 (0%)  
 pbcc98
 1 (0%)  
 skippyeddo
 1 (0%)  
 legosmashbro95
 1 (0%)  
 lfgalea
 1 (0%)  
 Parma
 1 (0%)  
 mike727
 1 (0%)  
 tb6423
 1 (0%)  
 hemiluvr
 1 (0%)  
 nchuang
 1 (0%)  
 jgt2598
 1 (0%)  
 rzavodny
 1 (0%)  
 apengmar
 1 (0%)  
 Xezusa
 1 (0%)  
 cridce5
 1 (0%)  
 CULLERSB
 1 (0%)  
 deco
 1 (0%)  
 lgw
 1 (0%)  
 gman008
 1 (0%)  
 nan
 1 (0%)  
 turk
 1 (0%)  
 ValleyAnnie
 1 (0%)  
 123
 1 (0%)  
 Dianew
 1 (0%)  
 markeb
 1 (0%)  
 v26f@aol.com
 1 (0%)  
 Collinwood Kid
 1 (0%)  
 snowmahn76
 1 (0%)  
 neohio43
 1 (0%)  
 ornerycat1
 1 (0%)  
 COOKER
 1 (0%)  
 rocky
 1 (0%)  
 Pantera123
 1 (0%)  
 BigRedEO
 1 (0%)  
 makgambit
 1 (0%)  
 teddykgb5023
 1 (0%)  
 lj
 1 (0%)  
 kevmpepsi
 1 (0%)  
 Ohiodaveg
 1 (0%)  
 snogboss
 1 (0%)  
 gregwalker
 1 (0%)  
 iamzooper
 1 (0%)  
 user10
 1 (0%)  
 ROADGRINDR
 1 (0%)  
 Librarian19
 1 (0%)  
 harristiffany28
 1 (0%)  
 drayk
 1 (0%)  
 Cleveland
 1 (0%)  
 ptwitch
 1 (0%)  
 west2eastdailycommute
 1 (0%)  
 goody
 1 (0%)  
 moe156
 1 (0%)  
 cindykirmm
 1 (0%)  
 talwater
 1 (0%)  
 kr
 1 (0%)  
 LineBet
 1 (0%)  
 Paulo
 1 (0%)  
 jfore
 1 (0%)  
 JJQ
 1 (0%)  
 karhughe
 1 (0%)  
 Kagedawg
 1 (0%)  
 voiceit
 1 (0%)  
 ChmEng
 1 (0%)  
 scortell
 1 (0%)  
 chughes
 1 (0%)  
 bridgegirl
 1 (0%)  
 kkelly
 1 (0%)  
 Becks201
 1 (0%)  
 arnold.682
 1 (0%)  
 kerrybeary
 1 (0%)  
 imiling1@gmail.com
 1 (0%)  
 dano99dr65
 1 (0%)  
 grande403
 1 (0%)  
 klabocki
 1 (0%)  
 baconmaster
 1 (0%)  
 gina44107
 1 (0%)  
 dbogdan
 1 (0%)  
 polivl
 1 (0%)  
 redhed
 1 (0%)  
 ssraj
 1 (0%)  
 stwrs
 1 (0%)  
 ROSEBUD
 1 (0%)  
 ultragod
 1 (0%)  
 ramjet827
 1 (0%)  
 eric
 1 (0%)  
 GNINE7169
 1 (0%)  
 JimOpie
 1 (0%)  
 bkgreenberg
 1 (0%)  
 wizkid1
 1 (0%)  
 sro722finn
 1 (0%)  
 baronsmear
 1 (0%)  
 Buck
 1 (0%)  
 dghyatt
 1 (0%)  
 gms
 1 (0%)  
 eecoming50
 1 (0%)  
 BugsMom
 1 (0%)  
 DCheck2
 1 (0%)  
 mike2634
 1 (0%)  
 jkap87
 1 (0%)  
 laurabrzygot
 1 (0%)  
 vmilluzz
 1 (0%)  
 royberko
 1 (0%)  
 tkellogg38
 1 (0%)  
 tollons
 1 (0%)  
 G G Galaxy
 1 (0%)  
 gogoego
 1 (0%)  
 jcallerding
 1 (0%)  
 rgmlkwd
 1 (0%)  
 jfkraft@aol.com
 1 (0%)  
 corkdiesle
 1 (0%)  
 b22j
 1 (0%)  
 mabfun@sbcglobal.net
 1 (0%)  
 mikey6us
 1 (0%)  
 jlwolf77
 1 (0%)  
 pegrobinson
 1 (0%)  
 m1
 1 (0%)  
 natebob
 1 (0%)  
 beepjeep01
 1 (0%)  
 seanrobinson
 1 (0%)  
 Stevebad
 1 (0%)  
 pezzy
 1 (0%)  
 kmaciak
 1 (0%)  
 Hunter2000
 1 (0%)  
 davek
 1 (0%)  
 mnagy
 1 (0%)  
 deliarobinson
 1 (0%)  
 DS1220
 1 (0%)  
 jmoore10
 1 (0%)  
 kipdig
 1 (0%)  
 MTomasko
 1 (0%)  
 afox2010
 1 (0%)  
 Ohio
 1 (0%)  
 mallans83
 1 (0%)  
 cpawar
 1 (0%)  
 mkoreny
 1 (0%)  
 lhrovat
 1 (0%)  
 aw113
 1 (0%)  
 KAT
 1 (0%)  
 jenlamb
 1 (0%)  
 paul1
 1 (0%)  
 skirth
 1 (0%)  
 lisa216
 1 (0%)  
 Keith
 1 (0%)  
 bsutter
 1 (0%)  
 marmar
 1 (0%)  
 bbucci
 1 (0%)  
 insanejake
 1 (0%)  
 bamdrama10
 1 (0%)  
 Kim Shaffer
 1 (0%)  
 NasierowskiEM
 1 (0%)  
 queensway8
 1 (0%)  
 get real
 2 (0%)  
 termujin
 1 (0%)  
 sschreiber
 1 (0%)  
 csciano
 1 (0%)  
 Rob0424
 1 (0%)  
 livelife2day
 1 (0%)  
 naveni
 1 (0%)  
 sclark626
 1 (0%)  
 frustrateddriver
 1 (0%)  
 denverwolf
 1 (0%)  
 FanofBridgeC
 1 (0%)  
 cpkxb
 1 (0%)  
 irongirl
 1 (0%)  
 C.Larson
 1 (0%)  
 hstretar
 1 (0%)  
 gina8108
 1 (0%)  
 bob
 1 (0%)  
 userbh
 1 (0%)  
 dcburkert
 1 (0%)  
 Monsterbuck
 1 (0%)  
 dpesta51
 1 (0%)  
 smkilbane
 1 (0%)  
 byeager@us.loreal.com
 1 (0%)  
 tomnar
 1 (0%)  
 jbalcomb
 1 (0%)  
 HiFi
 1 (0%)  
 honecyb@ccf.org
 1 (0%)  
 mich_516
 1 (0%)  
 drischel
 1 (0%)  
 ussalmiju
 1 (0%)  
 DKDOUG
 1 (0%)  
 missb
 1 (0%)  
 shakerwoman
 1 (0%)  
 abell25
 1 (0%)  
 mmancini
 1 (0%)  
 mikeg
 1 (0%)  
 Joyski1
 1 (0%)  
 Keez34
 1 (0%)  
 brandi1128
 1 (0%)  
 mtexeira
 1 (0%)  
 achilles
 1 (0%)  
 dvalpo27
 1 (0%)  
 c.hughes
 1 (0%)  
 schastai
 1 (0%)  
 gooster450
 1 (0%)  
 medina
 1 (0%)  
 memelio
 1 (0%)  
 A
 1 (0%)  
 huttonxc
 1 (0%)  
 cbarlow
 1 (0%)  
 Tally44
 1 (0%)  
 bmeyer
 1 (0%)  
 rockster737@yahoo.com
 1 (0%)  
 kristenannadams
 1 (0%)  
 brisy@live.com
 1 (0%)  
 scanupp
 1 (0%)  
 ironguy
 1 (0%)  
 vhaclecovela
 1 (0%)  
 BrownsFan
 1 (0%)  
 ralphtech
 1 (0%)  
 tshockey
 1 (0%)  
 Cleveland Resident
 1 (0%)  
 cleanwater
 1 (0%)  
 Bob Lewis
 1 (0%)  
 kings282
 1 (0%)  
 morlando
 1 (0%)  
 acb5054
 1 (0%)  
 TheGull85
 1 (0%)  
 mattink
 1 (0%)  
 ljthogue
 1 (0%)  
 rvsearson
 1 (0%)  
 Traci
 1 (0%)  
 jezzo
 1 (0%)  
 angiejo922
 1 (0%)  
 michaelrose
 1 (0%)  
 Mitch Myers
 1 (0%)  
 big daddy
 1 (0%)  
 pyrotec220
 1 (0%)  
 rackerm1
 1 (0%)  
 lindaz
 1 (0%)  
 fstretar
 1 (0%)  
 bones8181
 1 (0%)  
 mwinschel
 1 (0%)  
 carpenterdesign@mac.com
 1 (0%)  
 mabove58
 1 (0%)  
 lizzieb
 1 (0%)  
 jgreenwald
 1 (0%)  
 esalmi
 1 (0%)  
 clevelandlover
 1 (0%)  
 cjz
 1 (0%)  
 320baja
 1 (0%)  
 newclevelandbridge
 1 (0%)  
 didi
 1 (0%)  
 vic
 1 (0%)  
 christa3d
 1 (0%)  
 gbeers
 1 (0%)  
 lindahkraft
 1 (0%)  
 DJReiser
 1 (0%)  
 adjones79
 1 (0%)  
 jthomas21
 1 (0%)  
 johnziss
 1 (0%)  
 jasonz
 1 (0%)  
 aeberly
 1 (0%)  
 quinncj
 1 (0%)  
 cpresto
 1 (0%)  
 kmeyer
 1 (0%)  
 line&grade
 1 (0%)  
 ClevelandFan
 1 (0%)  
 H.P.Orient
 1 (0%)  
 drife
 1 (0%)  
 clevelandrocks
 1 (0%)  
 Skyviewer
 1 (0%)  
 lynnondrusko
 1 (0%)  
 sarahhoerst
 1 (0%)  
 aliben
 1 (0%)  
 bigram74
 2 (0%)  
 dana rife
 1 (0%)  
 tshimek
 1 (0%)  
 k-fed
 1 (0%)  
 Gail
 1 (0%)  
 morosz
 1 (0%)  
 ClevelandRocks
 1 (0%)  
 cps
 1 (0%)  
 farrem01
 1 (0%)  
 Engineer 43555
 1 (0%)  
 goody9691
 1 (0%)  
 atracy
 1 (0%)  
 MW
 1 (0%)  
 susanmcarroll101956
 1 (0%)  
 tschaefer
 1 (0%)  
 Abacusnv
 1 (0%)  
 dcb
 1 (0%)  
 JStret
 1 (0%)  
 luvcleve
 1 (0%)  
 kgluntz
 1 (0%)  
 dtenney
 1 (0%)  
 dvor5
 1 (0%)  
 waderice
 1 (0%)  
 Amberlee
 1 (0%)  
 linda072956@hotmail.com
 1 (0%)  
 aappell
 1 (0%)  
 akwdallas
 1 (0%)  
 cierra2010
 1 (0%)  
 catzrule80
 1 (0%)  
 itsmetrish
 1 (0%)  
 bigcheryl411
 1 (0%)  
 John312
 1 (0%)  
 stl_thomas
 1 (0%)  
 texeiramike
 1 (0%)  
 mniec@marykay.com
 1 (0%)  
 rogerg
 1 (0%)  
 lmg
 1 (0%)  
 denise
 1 (0%)  
 lgodec
 1 (0%)  
 BECKOWITZ1
 1 (0%)  
 JAU
 1 (0%)  
 gfrank
 1 (0%)  
 tabitha
 1 (0%)  
 kellyfleck
 1 (0%)  
 k2011
 1 (0%)  
 amleonard
 1 (0%)  
 bradws
 1 (0%)  
 Kevin Cronin
 1 (0%)  
 JoePeterlin
 1 (0%)  
 Tim Harden
 1 (0%)  
 KarnackTheSeer
 1 (0%)  
 huleah
 1 (0%)  
 BREWDOG
 1 (0%)  
 ctrepal
 1 (0%)  
 dmcdonald
 1 (0%)  
 tarler
 1 (0%)  
 fscelina
 1 (0%)  
 jgd07
 1 (0%)  
 Eileen Johnson
 1 (0%)  
 DeborahVanKleef
 1 (0%)  
 pathfinder
 1 (0%)  
 kswollan
 1 (0%)  
 glauch
 1 (0%)  
 mightychimp
 1 (0%)  
 Margaret
 1 (0%)  
 Tate8283
 1 (0%)  
 clevelandvoice
 1 (0%)  
 MikeC
 1 (0%)  
 averageuser
 1 (0%)  
 guintorx
 1 (0%)  
 wildwren
 1 (0%)  
 g4qwerty
 1 (0%)  
 DIVERDAVE
 1 (0%)  
 Edd Henderson
 1 (0%)  
 Fr. John Retar
 1 (0%)  
 mgiw17
 1 (0%)  
 robb
 1 (0%)  
 cindy
 1 (0%)  
 Sandy
 1 (0%)  
 sadfrantz
 1 (0%)  
 FLG
 1 (0%)  
 francolino
 1 (0%)  
 kpritcha
 1 (0%)  
 Tweener
 1 (0%)  
 rsimon
 1 (0%)  
 miked
 1 (0%)  
 rc06262004
 1 (0%)  
 brooks911
 1 (0%)  
 kinsalesam
 1 (0%)  
 tbone56
 1 (0%)  
 amytfitch
 1 (0%)  
 dt24
 1 (0%)  
 unlisted
 1 (0%)  
 lnique28
 1 (0%)  
 EBHolman
 1 (0%)  
 kmartter
 1 (0%)  
 foghorn47
 1 (0%)  
 wendyh
 1 (0%)  
 Rams72
 1 (0%)  
 dgalati
 1 (0%)  
 DaveE
 1 (0%)  
 kblake
 1 (0%)  
 prodigy73
 1 (0%)  
 clevelandergregm
 1 (0%)  
 tfutes
 2 (0%)  
 thewellmed
 1 (0%)  
 jmatuska
 1 (0%)  
 Sherry
 1 (0%)  
 ksimon
 1 (0%)  
 laura1sonny
 1 (0%)  
 jmartter
 1 (0%)  
 glonorb@roadrunner.com
 1 (0%)  
 Patrick
 1 (0%)  
 DirtDog
 1 (0%)  
 Bridgeguy
 1 (0%)  
 shue0307
 1 (0%)  
 geichler
 1 (0%)  
 schmitter
 1 (0%)  
 msladky
 1 (0%)  
 jimp
 1 (0%)  
 Redhawk
 1 (0%)  
 DKrutz
 1 (0%)  
 ecam71
 1 (0%)  
 mayo
 1 (0%)  
 lakemanoh
 1 (0%)  
 jafish
 1 (0%)  
 karenl
 1 (0%)  
 gssalt
 1 (0%)  
 cbstutz
 1 (0%)  
 jjj12345
 1 (0%)  
 KellyBarnes
 1 (0%)  
 jo1queen
 1 (0%)  
 jilltissue
 1 (0%)  
 kevo
 1 (0%)  
 kpetty
 1 (0%)  
 pyags
 1 (0%)  
 cd159005@ohio.edu
 1 (0%)  
 avidqueen
 1 (0%)  
 pettykristie
 1 (0%)  
 tbasone
 1 (0%)  
 Kent C
 1 (0%)  
 JZ22699@HOTMAIL.COM
 1 (0%)  
 debbie8
 1 (0%)  
 LWoods
 1 (0%)  
 Pamelal
 1 (0%)  
 tfiling
 1 (0%)  
 Helmet
 1 (0%)  
 agallc
 1 (0%)  
 pnortz
 1 (0%)  
 dawn
 1 (0%)  
 slowspeedrail
 1 (0%)  
 footballguy
 1 (0%)  
 john
 2 (0%)  
 esprad13
 1 (0%)  
 tmartter
 1 (0%)  
 emilyamh
 1 (0%)  
 Norton500T
 1 (0%)  
 tink
 1 (0%)  
 KAM
 1 (0%)  
 1oldman
 1 (0%)  
 linkslover
 1 (0%)  
 T
 1 (0%)  
 boborn
 1 (0%)  
 jharrison03
 1 (0%)  
 comments1
 1 (0%)  
 rockboy666
 1 (0%)  
 lmorris
 1 (0%)  
 jrevtai
 1 (0%)  
 jpsa1139
 1 (0%)  
 jspragg78
 1 (0%)  
 mrt
 1 (0%)  
 carrieh2469
 1 (0%)  
 jack456
 1 (0%)  
 browns
 1 (0%)  
 bushmaster
 1 (0%)  
 Downtown09
 1 (0%)  
 kuch3399
 1 (0%)  
 nathan9986
 1 (0%)  
 mzavoda
 1 (0%)  
 marcialampman
 1 (0%)  
 colotto
 1 (0%)  
 JessicaG
 1 (0%)  
 schubach
 1 (0%)  
 CarolB
 1 (0%)  
 Brian
 1 (0%)  
 kengel
 1 (0%)  
 redmaar
 1 (0%)  
 design4all
 1 (0%)  
 MarathonMan777
 1 (0%)  
 macmanus
 1 (0%)  
 gaoshuai
 1 (0%)  
 canoegirl1
 1 (0%)  
 ed73
 1 (0%)  
 mattdilling
 1 (0%)  
 catstoo
 1 (0%)  
 justpurvi
 1 (0%)  
 peasupe82
 1 (0%)  
 purvim
 1 (0%)  
 tyler_garrett
 1 (0%)  
 crobin1981
 1 (0%)  
 Teala
 1 (0%)  
 LyndhurstVoter
 1 (0%)  
 Ladydi_no5
 1 (0%)  
 ObjectiveVoter
 1 (0%)  
 pd17
 1 (0%)  
 riecan31
 1 (0%)  
 jfbazb
 1 (0%)  
 achkar
 1 (0%)  
 Jump1
 1 (0%)  
 hdxlcowboy
 1 (0%)  
 spartans5
 1 (0%)  
 lmbloulou
 1 (0%)  
 ruralmastermind
 1 (0%)  
 cel25
 1 (0%)  
 pobyc
 1 (0%)  
 tomlynnlab
 1 (0%)  
 ajthomas1951@comcast.net
 1 (0%)  
 robinpfeifer
 1 (0%)  
 kristenb1036
 1 (0%)  
 medinamommy
 1 (0%)  
 Luckydog1
 1 (0%)  
 asha
 1 (0%)  
 dmckinney26
 1 (0%)  
 dwalker
 1 (0%)  
 drneal
 1 (0%)  
 donsmusic
 1 (0%)  
 don6771
 1 (0%)  
 MikeK
 1 (0%)  
 Joel
 1 (0%)  
 ClevelandBridge2010
 1 (0%)  
 agolem
 1 (0%)  
 jeffe
 1 (0%)  
 saxotromba
 1 (0%)  
 kebunny@roadrunner.com
 1 (0%)  
 stephyd
 1 (0%)  
 gnappy
 1 (0%)  
 osudj
 1 (0%)  
 svb207
 1 (0%)  
 knjk
 1 (0%)  
 carriesears
 1 (0%)  
 spamerhi
 1 (0%)  
 rghood
 1 (0%)  
 Hedgehog
 1 (0%)  
 arvid1388
 1 (0%)  
 carlsbig
 1 (0%)  
 davids
 1 (0%)  
 Lcahill
 1 (0%)  
 roncoll
 1 (0%)  
 Iamvote
 1 (0%)  
 RobX
 1 (0%)  
 cspragg
 1 (0%)  
 mragland01
 1 (0%)  
 Marmom
 1 (0%)  
 butch
 1 (0%)  
 lebron
 1 (0%)  
 Fay
 1 (0%)  
 Kris Deutsch
 1 (0%)  
 WGnap
 1 (0%)  
 brianr
 1 (0%)  
 BillyBob
 1 (0%)  
 tmar
 1 (0%)  
 mel
 1 (0%)  
 AJBear
 1 (0%)  
 earth girl
 1 (0%)  
 grump55
 1 (0%)  
 Big_Tuna
 1 (0%)  
 katieob13
 1 (0%)  
 kioshe
 1 (0%)  
 Rebecca
 1 (0%)  
 jjohnson05
 1 (0%)  
 mmen
 1 (0%)  
 rjackanic
 1 (0%)  
 sef37
 1 (0%)  
 b693m
 1 (0%)  
 kdamiano
 1 (0%)  
 lugnut
 1 (0%)  
 Gmac
 1 (0%)  
 jlm7
 1 (0%)  
 Julie B
 1 (0%)  
 tommyg
 1 (0%)  
 jmeyer1
 1 (0%)  
 HowiePorter
 1 (0%)  
 slandrum
 1 (0%)  
 kristawagner
 1 (0%)  
 citizen#1
 1 (0%)  
 lashley1
 1 (0%)  
 caj975190
 1 (0%)  
 unimaginative_designs
 1 (0%)  
 claudel2653
 1 (0%)  
 bmoss
 1 (0%)  
 chinmm
 1 (0%)  
 zgirl
 1 (0%)  
 Cari2431
 1 (0%)  
 workerbee
 1 (0%)  
 cementhead
 1 (0%)  
 spunky00
 1 (0%)  
 cjdamico
 1 (0%)  
 strong1
 1 (0%)  
 awatson
 1 (0%)  
 SALLY1
 1 (0%)  
 allysonmehta@yahoo.com
 1 (0%)  
 Scott H.
 1 (0%)  
 twright227@hotmail.com
 1 (0%)  
 Sunny
 1 (0%)  
 boxcar1903
 1 (0%)  
 DesignA
 1 (0%)  
 cpr22
 1 (0%)  
 cleveland76
 1 (0%)  
 kravos
 1 (0%)  
 njm1
 1 (0%)  
 woop woop
 1 (0%)  
 kallanson
 1 (0%)  
 traumarn
 1 (0%)  
 jdamico4
 1 (0%)  
 Christine
 1 (0%)  
 jlr
 1 (0%)  
 DanBeltzer
 1 (0%)  
 ajolsen28
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge Traveller
 1 (0%)  
 mglinsky
 1 (0%)  
 jaspery
 1 (0%)  
 NOD772
 1 (0%)  
 gfindlan
 1 (0%)  
 markkikel
 1 (0%)  
 Boots
 1 (0%)  
 mfournier
 1 (0%)  
 FranklySpeaking
 1 (0%)  
 AJJr
 1 (0%)  
 Becky
 1 (0%)  
 wolverine158
 1 (0%)  
 bderwis
 1 (0%)  
 rutledge
 1 (0%)  
 playtennis
 1 (0%)  
 klbevy3
 1 (0%)  
 kamikazes
 1 (0%)  
 cd123
 1 (0%)  
 agentb
 1 (0%)  
 scstaab
 1 (0%)  
 amymal
 1 (0%)  
 karl
 1 (0%)  
 mtex
 1 (0%)  
 chardles
 1 (0%)  
 pkappy
 1 (0%)  
 bbattig
 1 (0%)  
 ilijasiamquality
 1 (0%)  
 mtomlinson
 1 (0%)  
 jar34
 1 (0%)  
 bdewaddell
 1 (0%)  
 wpdbush
 1 (0%)  
 Jim59
 1 (0%)  
 igelco
 1 (0%)  
 ln17
 1 (0%)  
 hughes
 1 (0%)  
 eg84b
 1 (0%)  
 abelasik
 1 (0%)  
 janefalk
 1 (0%)  
 jupiter
 1 (0%)  
 Vsheets
 1 (0%)  
 mur001
 1 (0%)  
 kellybucknick
 1 (0%)  
 rspekis
 1 (0%)  
 bnau686
 1 (0%)  
 jmetcalf
 1 (0%)  
 kh181406
 1 (0%)  
 smpco02
 1 (0%)  
 Ryan
 1 (0%)  
 psnanigan
 1 (0%)  
 kzacc
 1 (0%)  
 scheidja
 1 (0%)  
 rockiologist
 1 (0%)  
 mhillis@tglcc.com
 1 (0%)  
 clegros
 1 (0%)  
 steve33
 1 (0%)  
 mm2010
 1 (0%)  
 snighman
 1 (0%)  
 Ellenz
 1 (0%)  
 JAG
 1 (0%)  
 brookgate
 1 (0%)  
 lefty5170
 1 (0%)  
 TerriS72
 1 (0%)  
 ashley.elber
 1 (0%)  
 dbonham
 1 (0%)  
 Sunspotting
 1 (0%)  
 Ben
 1 (0%)  
 LoveforCLE
 1 (0%)  
 finance1
 1 (0%)  
 dmolnar
 1 (0%)  
 IC Houserocker
 1 (0%)  
 VICTOR
 1 (0%)  
 Pistol Pete
 1 (0%)  
 dob_osu
 1 (0%)  
 ed
 1 (0%)  
 lrolf
 1 (0%)  
 73trman
 1 (0%)  
 uvote
 1 (0%)  
 Judi Carmody
 1 (0%)  
 seakstries@yahoo.com
 1 (0%)  
 ronnietrainer
 1 (0%)  
 keekee
 1 (0%)  
 Russ
 1 (0%)  
 Greg1473
 1 (0%)  
 dan123
 1 (0%)  
 PirateJeep
 1 (0%)  
 TFath
 1 (0%)  
 defiorej
 1 (0%)  
 the horse 18
 1 (0%)  
 MagicJoe
 1 (0%)  
 denisek
 1 (0%)  
 Johampton15316
 1 (0%)  
 maureenressler
 1 (0%)  
 magic
 1 (0%)  
 HighHopes
 1 (0%)  
 beauty enthusiast
 1 (0%)  
 Laura630
 1 (0%)  
 jcbartel
 1 (0%)  
 catfish
 1 (0%)  
 InnerBeltBridge
 1 (0%)  
 rhaag
 1 (0%)  
 Connor
 1 (0%)  
 jimmyp68
 1 (0%)  
 dawgface99
 1 (0%)  
 Teo
 1 (0%)  
 skinny legs
 1 (0%)  
 Blaine02
 1 (0%)  
 italy2010
 1 (0%)  
 breynolds
 1 (0%)  
 frank Vanah
 1 (0%)  
 Driver
 1 (0%)  
 raydawn22
 1 (0%)  
 ghqman
 1 (0%)  
 czmalpha
 1 (0%)  
 cwidemire
 1 (0%)  
 rjay0625
 1 (0%)  
 mo.weber
 1 (0%)  
 jwtyler
 1 (0%)  
 rich33
 1 (0%)  
 m_i_rish
 1 (0%)  
 GoForIt
 1 (0%)  
 Colleen Cunningham
 1 (0%)  
 bestbridge
 1 (0%)  
 pvanah
 1 (0%)  
 JJ
 1 (0%)  
 catrinaaa
 1 (0%)  
 BT-wbyOH
 1 (0%)  
 Rob
 1 (0%)  
 jm4
 1 (0%)  
 PAMBONHAM
 1 (0%)  
 rsimon999
 1 (0%)  
 JPSkowronski
 1 (0%)  
 CMaltby
 1 (0%)  
 kgz25@hotmail.com
 1 (0%)  
 jwj2010
 1 (0%)  
 bear001
 1 (0%)  
 shellyg
 1 (0%)  
 rweist
 1 (0%)  
 Heidi1
 1 (0%)  
 greg123
 1 (0%)  
 mrm23
 1 (0%)  
 My Cleveland My Home
 1 (0%)  
 thebeave
 1 (0%)  
 euyek
 1 (0%)  
 rugbyman87
 1 (0%)  
 eposton
 1 (0%)  
 Bill
 1 (0%)  
 dawg130
 1 (0%)  
 kirion
 1 (0%)  
 surbas
 1 (0%)  
 m1stv
 1 (0%)  
 ELStockhausen
 1 (0%)  
 C.C.F.
 1 (0%)  
 Mikey D
 1 (0%)  
 houseboxer
 1 (0%)  
 rnicholson
 1 (0%)  
 orincon19
 1 (0%)  
 krischelle03
 1 (0%)  
 pjpucci
 1 (0%)  
 ohio4eva
 1 (0%)  
 bridgefanatic
 1 (0%)  
 bucklady
 1 (0%)  
 jshsntn
 1 (0%)  
 AnnM
 1 (0%)  
 bUschman69
 1 (0%)  
 OZ
 1 (0%)  
 dgent210
 1 (0%)  
 mgrafmeyer
 1 (0%)  
 mgray29
 2 (0%)  
 gabby
 1 (0%)  
 redrose
 1 (0%)  
 anderson
 1 (0%)  
 k2fer
 1 (0%)  
 TB
 1 (0%)  
 evenjoe
 1 (0%)  
 ddter
 1 (0%)  
 mshaver6
 1 (0%)  
 Zeke035
 1 (0%)  
 wigwam
 1 (0%)  
 emiliegarofolo@att.net
 1 (0%)  
 ohiou96
 1 (0%)  
 tyagersz
 1 (0%)  
 ilijashealey
 1 (0%)  
 Ferb
 1 (0%)  
 tropical transport
 1 (0%)  
 sdetzel
 1 (0%)  
 nickging
 1 (0%)  
 bozrita
 1 (0%)  
 as260704
 1 (0%)  
 MEANGENE
 1 (0%)  
 rshapter
 1 (0%)  
 jacques
 1 (0%)  
 fritz
 1 (0%)  
 rmzupancic
 1 (0%)  
 sfuture
 1 (0%)  
 mtefs
 1 (0%)  
 kari81hayes
 1 (0%)  
 tkhayes
 1 (0%)  
 jtigue
 1 (0%)  
 chimaira1
 1 (0%)  
 Panger
 1 (0%)  
 jeffodot
 1 (0%)  
 BSNewbrough
 1 (0%)  
 bcnusoon
 1 (0%)  
 mario1369
 1 (0%)  
 Mattf
 1 (0%)  
 Fritz689
 1 (0%)  
 jefferson
 1 (0%)  
 a121373
 1 (0%)  
 djwalkerpe
 1 (0%)  
 bigdog6786@att.net
 1 (0%)  
 Cheryl
 1 (0%)  
 sesjr
 1 (0%)  
 dblessing
 1 (0%)  
 hrbran
 1 (0%)  
 steenw
 1 (0%)  
 OldNativeClevelander
 1 (0%)  
 Michael
 1 (0%)  
 tom_kocinski
 1 (0%)  
 torsion
 1 (0%)  
 labor860
 1 (0%)  
 dweim1321
 1 (0%)  
 harleyguy442
 1 (0%)  
 mjgoose
 1 (0%)  
 AdamRuss
 1 (0%)  
Total: 1351

2. Zip Code: (this must match your previously submitted Zip Code in order for your response to be considered)

 44054
 2 (0%)  
 44109
 22 (2%) 
 
 44077
 19 (1%) 
 
 44135
 11 (1%) 
 
 44111
 28 (2%) 
 
 44125
 11 (1%) 
 
 44138
 7 (1%) 
 
 44139
 15 (1%) 
 
 44110
 4 (0%)  
 44145
 34 (3%) 
 
 44126
 10 (1%) 
 
 44144
 19 (1%) 
 
 44221
 6 (0%) 
 
 44116
 19 (1%) 
 
 44256
 52 (4%) 
 
 44124
 12 (1%) 
 
 44273
 4 (0%)  
 66213
 1 (0%)  
 44123
 9 (1%) 
 
 44102
 18 (1%) 
 
 66061
 1 (0%)  
 44147
 13 (1%) 
 
 44120
 4 (0%)  
 44662
 2 (0%)  
 44319
 9 (1%) 
 
 44107
 59 (4%) 
 
 44060
 27 (2%) 
 
 44130
 18 (1%) 
 
 44134
 19 (1%) 
 
 44133
 27 (2%) 
 
 90038
 1 (0%)  
 44118
 27 (2%) 
 
 44121
 5 (0%) 
 
 44113
 29 (2%) 
 
 44087
 9 (1%) 
 
 44023
 6 (0%) 
 
 44129
 24 (2%) 
 
 46324
 1 (0%)  
 44119
 7 (1%) 
 
 16046
 2 (0%)  
 44017
 10 (1%) 
 
 44140
 13 (1%) 
 
 44501
 1 (0%)  
 44143
 16 (1%) 
 
 15212
 1 (0%)  
 44236
 5 (0%) 
 
 44646
 5 (0%) 
 
 4417
 1 (0%)  
 44039
 12 (1%) 
 
 44095
 19 (1%) 
 
 44142
 6 (0%) 
 
 44012
 9 (1%) 
 
 44115
 2 (0%)  
 44131
 42 (3%) 
 
 44004
 3 (0%)  
 44028
 1 (0%)  
 44092
 3 (0%)  
 44070
 26 (2%) 
 
 44321
 11 (1%) 
 
 44022
 9 (1%) 
 
 44146
 12 (1%) 
 
 15136
 2 (0%)  
 44011
 10 (1%) 
 
 15228
 1 (0%)  
 44136
 20 (1%) 
 
 44053
 3 (0%)  
 44101
 7 (1%) 
 
 44122
 20 (1%) 
 
 44067
 12 (1%) 
 
 44720
 2 (0%)  
 44310
 3 (0%)  
 44141
 22 (2%) 
 
 15222
 1 (0%)  
 44094
 11 (1%) 
 
 44106
 12 (1%) 
 
 15001
 1 (0%)  
 23456
 1 (0%)  
 44024
 5 (0%) 
 
 44001
 6 (0%) 
 
 34698
 1 (0%)  
 66111
 1 (0%)  
 46552
 1 (0%)  
 20904
 1 (0%)  
 44241
 3 (0%)  
 44233
 7 (1%) 
 
 66097
 1 (0%)  
 44081
 2 (0%)  
 44035
 7 (1%) 
 
 44264
 3 (0%)  
 66209
 1 (0%)  
 44128
 1 (0%)  
 44118-3008
 1 (0%)  
 44691
 6 (0%) 
 
 44134-2330
 1 (0%)  
 44149
 5 (0%) 
 
 44026
 3 (0%)  
 15211
 1 (0%)  
 44864
 1 (0%)  
 44057
 7 (1%) 
 
 44040
 2 (0%)  
 44270
 2 (0%)  
 64068
 1 (0%)  
 44286
 7 (1%) 
 
 44103
 2 (0%)  
 44212
 11 (1%) 
 
 44280
 2 (0%)  
 44121-2505
 1 (0%)  
 44320
 3 (0%)  
 44108-1416
 1 (0%)  
 46923
 1 (0%)  
 44111-2416
 1 (0%)  
 44044
 2 (0%)  
 43950
 1 (0%)  
 44056
 4 (0%)  
 44117
 3 (0%)  
 44224
 8 (1%) 
 
 44137-1314
 1 (0%)  
 44114
 4 (0%)  
 44203
 6 (0%) 
 
 44116-4024
 1 (0%)  
 44333
 6 (0%) 
 
 44132
 6 (0%) 
 
 44837
 1 (0%)  
 44266
 4 (0%)  
 45203
 1 (0%)  
 44632
 1 (0%)  
 44847
 1 (0%)  
 44703
 1 (0%)  
 44805
 2 (0%)  
 44111-3526
 1 (0%)  
 44094-8715
 1 (0%)  
 44302
 1 (0%)  
 15022
 3 (0%)  
 44211
 1 (0%)  
 44202
 7 (1%) 
 
 44201
 4 (0%)  
 44671
 1 (0%)  
 44260
 5 (0%) 
 
 44870
 2 (0%)  
 60558
 1 (0%)  
 44113-3639
 1 (0%)  
 44105
 7 (1%) 
 
 44090
 1 (0%)  
 16066
 2 (0%)  
 44906
 1 (0%)  
 44109-4505
 1 (0%)  
 43614
 1 (0%)  
 44240
 5 (0%) 
 
 44065
 3 (0%)  
 45208
 1 (0%)  
 44272
 1 (0%)  
 44313
 4 (0%)  
 16116
 1 (0%)  
 43402
 3 (0%)  
 44824
 1 (0%)  
 33146
 1 (0%)  
 41011
 1 (0%)  
 44137
 2 (0%)  
 16148
 1 (0%)  
 44412
 1 (0%)  
 15236
 1 (0%)  
 16137
 1 (0%)  
 1525
 1 (0%)  
 60606
 1 (0%)  
 15143
 3 (0%)  
 44072
 3 (0%)  
 15241
 1 (0%)  
 44287
 2 (0%)  
 15401
 3 (0%)  
 01746
 2 (0%)  
 17532
 3 (0%)  
 20052
 1 (0%)  
 17603
 3 (0%)  
 15146
 2 (0%)  
 44905
 1 (0%)  
 15473
 1 (0%)  
 44021
 2 (0%)  
 15017
 3 (0%)  
 15317
 2 (0%)  
 18013
 1 (0%)  
 44278
 1 (0%)  
 53207
 1 (0%)  
 44907
 1 (0%)  
 17011
 1 (0%)  
 15243
 2 (0%)  
 07040
 1 (0%)  
 15044
 1 (0%)  
 17566
 1 (0%)  
 44312
 2 (0%)  
 17522
 1 (0%)  
 15239
 1 (0%)  
 44274
 4 (0%)  
 45844
 3 (0%)  
 44281
 13 (1%) 
 
 44710
 1 (0%)  
 30517
 1 (0%)  
 44223
 4 (0%)  
 66062
 1 (0%)  
 32821
 1 (0%)  
 49408
 2 (0%)  
 17406
 1 (0%)  
 45891
 1 (0%)  
 87124
 1 (0%)  
 37074
 1 (0%)  
 19087
 2 (0%)  
 17551
 2 (0%)  
 15417
 1 (0%)  
 49464
 1 (0%)  
 60464
 1 (0%)  
 15429
 1 (0%)  
 49922
 1 (0%)  
 01505
 1 (0%)  
 43035
 4 (0%)  
 44121-2994
 1 (0%)  
 44622
 1 (0%)  
 44614
 2 (0%)  
 45431
 1 (0%)  
 92203
 2 (0%)  
 30064
 1 (0%)  
 45030
 1 (0%)  
 44718
 1 (0%)  
 44429
 1 (0%)  
 35077
 1 (0%)  
 44282
 1 (0%)  
 44711-0705
 1 (0%)  
 44685
 3 (0%)  
 44253
 1 (0%)  
 44306
 1 (0%)  
 44826
 2 (0%)  
 44262
 1 (0%)  
 60194
 1 (0%)  
 44702
 1 (0%)  
 43231
 1 (0%)  
 43215
 2 (0%)  
 43054
 1 (0%)  
 45504
 1 (0%)  
 43081
 3 (0%)  
 43220
 1 (0%)  
 43017
 1 (0%)  
 48168
 1 (0%)  
 43123
 1 (0%)  
 43214
 1 (0%)  
 43023
 1 (0%)  
 43065
 2 (0%)  
 43749
 1 (0%)  
 19355
 1 (0%)  
 53040
 1 (0%)  
 44074
 2 (0%)  
 20879
 1 (0%)  
 15068
 1 (0%)  
 60613
 1 (0%)  
 44230
 2 (0%)  
 15025
 1 (0%)  
 43440
 1 (0%)  
 19547
 1 (0%)  
 44621
 1 (0%)  
 15129
 1 (0%)  
 44663
 1 (0%)  
 43021
 1 (0%)  
 B
 1 (0%)  
 44303
 2 (0%)  
 43230
 1 (0%)  
 45036
 1 (0%)  
 43204
 1 (0%)  
 60107
 1 (0%)  
 43140
 1 (0%)  
 80026
 1 (0%)  
 60610
 1 (0%)  
 02127
 1 (0%)  
 60035
 1 (0%)  
 43147
 1 (0%)  
 43207
 1 (0%)  
 48307
 1 (0%)  
 33256
 1 (0%)  
 15229
 1 (0%)  
 15012
 2 (0%)  
 43310
 1 (0%)  
 15227
 1 (0%)  
 44814
 1 (0%)  
 48179
 1 (0%)  
 44255
 1 (0%)  
 33477
 1 (0%)  
 17601
 1 (0%)  
 17584
 1 (0%)  
 15601
 1 (0%)  
 44514
 1 (0%)  
 15213
 1 (0%)  
 4107
 1 (0%)  
 43452
 1 (0%)  
 43085
 2 (0%)  
 60618
 1 (0%)  
 17325
 1 (0%)  
 43026
 1 (0%)  
 17366
 1 (0%)  
 15122
 1 (0%)  
 15501
 1 (0%)  
 15063
 1 (0%)  
 43235
 2 (0%)  
 20176
 1 (0%)  
 32824
 1 (0%)  
 43229
 1 (0%)  
 62849
 1 (0%)  
 44085
 1 (0%)  
 44055-2118
 1 (0%)  
 44301
 1 (0%)  
Total: 1351

3. A. The design should be inspired by Cleveland’s civic, industrial and bridge design history, and should be the next contribution to the rich bridge architectural history of the valley. It should respect the aesthetic history of this place.

How well does each design reflect the above criteria?

  
Does not meet Criteria
Meets Criteria
Exceeds Criteria
(%)1312211737
Bridge A
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
 12345
(%)45282231
Bridge B
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
 12345
(%)2416151332
Bridge C
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
12345
Total: 1351

4. Please provide further explanation or comments regarding your selections for Question A

 bridge a fits in with the other bridges
 1 (0%)  
 The Bridge C design holds a Iconic symbol that Clevelanders can call their own. I would hope that the city would embrace this design and add to Clevelands Skyline view of the Gateway Arenas.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is sleek, minimialist, but awesome is inspred by a modernistic design, without going too above and beyond.  Bridge C is artwork that also meets and exceeds, and perhaps sets a new precedent for bridge design in Cleveland.  Bridge B is too minimalist and doesn't provide any architectural enhancements to the city, onjly the utility of another bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 I like Selection C, however if A and C where combine, it would be absolutely perfect!
 1 (0%)  
 I think bridge A and bridge C are the most aesthetically pleasing of the three designs. I the additional curved supports of the C bridge are excellent touch and will add another recognizeable piece of engineering to the already diverse skyline of the city.
 1 (0%)  
  
 3 (0%) 
 
 Choose Bridge A. The design is more modern and will help cleveland look better. Bridge B is pretty standard and boring. Bridge C is nice but Bridge A looks better
 1 (0%)  
 This bridge will blend nicely with the other bridges that surround the city. All around, this looks like the best design!
 1 (0%)  
 It looks very nice, and seems like that it would fit in with clevelands design history. It is a modernized version, however as well has the features of cleveland's past bridges.  It is sort of like the 2010 chevy camaro. It has similar features to the 1969 Camaro, however it is very modern and fits this period in time very well.
 1 (0%)  
 I think Bridge A would fit the city the best. Bridge C taking a close second. Brige B is just boring, nothing great about, it would be like another Valley View Bridge. my vote goes to A.
 1 (0%)  
 Cleveland has several bridges and while two are utilitarian one is gorgeous garved stone.  If you really want to show design history or architectural history make it look like the Hope Memorial Bridge.  Now that's class.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge A looks nice, nothing over the top yet a great design..and i really like the night time shot   bridge b is okay kinda plain and boring..i think something a bit more spectacular agisnt the downtown back drop is needed like with the other 2 plans   bridge c i like but it wuld be nicer if the suspension structure actually spaned the river..it appears that it does not in the pictures, its just at the begining of the bridge and thet seems kind of pointless to me
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A and C are the only choices in my opinion. Bridge B is just another slab highway. I feel C to be the best choice to offer appealing architecture BOTH above and below the bridge.....It appeals from below and while driving across.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B looks like the typical highway bridge that you would see in this area.  Frankly, it's boring and ugly.  Bridge C is too much.  It doesn't fit in with our skyline at all.  Bridge A is a nice balance between the two extremes.  It still has the typical highway bridge elements, but ramped up just enough to make it more aesthetically pleasing. 
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C would be a step into the new architectural history of the valley.
 1 (0%)  
 if the design on bridge C was continued maybe it would be nicer. the plain span of b and, for the most part, c put me to sleep.
 1 (0%)  
 It would be great to combine the two designs. I like the support designs of Bridge A, but it would be better if it had the suspension element that is seen in Bridge C.
 1 (0%)  
 When I travel, what catches my eye, is the landmark in that particular city. Cleveland is rich with history, but we are starting over. The newer contemporary bridge would stand out for miles.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A and B both blend well with the current architecture. Bridge C is much more futuristic in appearance and would reflect well in the new direction Cleveland is heading. Time for Cleveland to begins it evolution.
 1 (0%)  
 I would prefer a modernistic look..for the future Bridge A and B fit those..Bridge C with its pipe arches doesnt fit...something Like the Bridge in Toledo,OH on I 280  would be more appropriate and would be desirable
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is an optimum choice - the design almost appears 'futuristic' while capturing a simple/classical look with the 'arches' that reach for the sky.  Given Cleveland's presence in the medical field and multiple advancements, medical mart opportunities, the 'wave' of the arch reminds me of a heart rhythm letting others know Cleveland is still full of life; on the same token, it almost appears to be a wave or ripple in the lake, if you will, to show Cleveland will once again be 'making waves' to revive itself back to stardom.  Bridge A seems to conservative in appearance - almost like the structure we have now.  Cleveland is advancing, and the architecture should reflect that.  Why go back to an 'older' design?  Bridge B, from underneath, has the appearance of urban life and 'strength,' but I think the bridge should be noticed from above, and below, and C clearly is the best choice in that regard.
 1 (0%)  
 I love Bridge C.  I think it is stylish and makes a statement.  I believe it would add to the skyline of the city and be a design that visitors would remember.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges B and C do not reflect the aesthetic history of Cleveland's bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 all the designs lack imagination. There is nothing that makes these designs a contemporary signature to redefine a vibrant city. Bridge C is the most disappointing in aesthetics
 1 (0%)  
 The bridge should be a reflection of Cleveland's future, as well as it's past. Only design C feels optimistic. I don't see anything that offers a unique sense of place. I fail to see respect for Cleveland when these feel like they could fit into any midwestern city. For instance, there's beautiful detailing on the "Guardians" of the Lorain bridge. Why are these so plain? Opportunities to significantly impact Cleveland's skyline and the very point of entry into the city are "twice-a-century" rare so why is there not a greater effort being made for a dramatic, visual statement?
 1 (0%)  
 Great design, clean and does not compromise and overwhelm city scape.  I think this is a the best of all 3 bridge designs asthetically speaking
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A and C should be combined.
 1 (0%)  
 All three bridges have a very boring look and do not come close to making a contribution to the "rich bridge architectural history of the valley." Bridge B is the least appealing and least architecturally inspiring.
 1 (0%)  
 I like the modern aspect of Bridge A. Bridge C is flashy but I feel it would block the view of downtown upon arrival. Bridge A seems to be the most suitable for enhancing the city skyline.
 1 (0%)  
 Clean design from above, lighting accent underside outstanding feature
 1 (0%)  
 These bridges are the most unimaginative I have seen as a structural engineer and a highway traveler. Bridges in any other state are more attractive that the bridges in Ohio, save the Rt 22 bridge at Steubenville and the Toledo interstate bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 All 3 bridge designs are nice.  However, Bridge A has nicer architectural detail under the bridge surface that just reminds me of other beautiful Cleveland area bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A, if built as shown with the arches and just as importantly, the lighting, could be a beautiful addition to the downtown skyline. Bridge B looks much too generic, like it could belong to any city in the country. With bridge C, while the suspension feature looks good, the rest of the bridge is too bland.
 1 (0%)  
 I THINK C ISN'T AS FANCY AS THE OTHER TWO CHOICES, BUT IT SEEMS TO ATTRACT MY ATTENTION MORE.  FLASHY ISN'T ALWAYS THE BEST WAY TO GET PEOPLE EXCITEDABOUT A PROJECT.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C has a great design would really stand out. Much better than a standard bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is boring. Although it looks structurally sound, there is nothing that really contributes to the aesthetic history of Cleveland. I like the lighting effects on Bridge A, but Bridge C is clearly a winner, with a unique and innovative overpass design.
 1 (0%)  
 At first glance, A has the design appeal of Cleveland (solid, rugged) with touch of class.
 1 (0%)  
 B focuses on City not bridge itself.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is a really poor attempt to incorporate two distinctively different bridge types.  The attempt to introduce an ARCH design just doesnt work here.  Either have an arch or don't.
 1 (0%)  
 Design A looks absolutely the best.  I'll be driving over it every day.  Design C looks like a advertisement for McDonalds
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A design provides a focus on the water which is a huge focus for Cleveland and Northeast Ohio. It is a classic structure - lending a note to historical elements while feeling like it's up to date. It's not too modern (like Bridge C) and it's not ugly (like Bridge B).
 1 (0%)  
 I like the idea of plan "C" cable bridge by Progressive Field coupled with the steel structural spans of plan "A". If both could be combined, the bridge would reflect Cleveland's steel history/ image along with a new style Cleveland has not seen and needs.
 1 (0%)  
 Two factors are at work; Cleveland's industrial history, which has been primarily focused steel production and heavy manufacturing, and the existing bridges over the river, all of which are varied in terms of their architecture, and some of which are quite unique, even on a national level. Of the three designs, Bridge B is COMPLETELY BLAND and looks like a standard interstate highway bridge. There really appears to be nothing unique about it. Brudge A and Bridge C do reflect Cleveland's metalworking past (and present) to a degree, though Bridge A does so more than Bridge C. Bridge A is my preference, because it has a brawny presence, suggesting strength, but also highlighting the metal in its construction. Bridge C is unique only in where it crosses over Ontario, but otherwise it is a very bland and non-unique appearance; Bridge A's look is more timeless and unique of the three.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A looks progressive and stylish.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B looks like same old, same old we already have. Too plain. Bridge A keeps surrounding styles but vamps it up slightly. Not enough. Bridge C is a knock out looking bridge that reflects modern times in our area.  I love Bridge C!
 1 (0%)  
 i really like the slick design of bridge C, it is old school yet a little modern.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B looka like every bridge on any freeway anywhere in the usa. I like A for Cleveland, but the relation of the steel to the concrete loks like a really poor design, if detailed correctyl could be great. I like C because it creats a new entry gate and possibly a new symbol for Cleveland, I like to see some kinf of mix of A and C.
 1 (0%)  
 Boring, Boring, and Being Done Everywhere.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C barely meet the criteria. From an aesthetic/architechtural perspective and for half a billion dollars we arent geting much. This city was built on manufacturing and the steel industry. There is no metal structure rising up making it unique to say..this is Cleveland! It should one of the focal points of downtown...it should be a metal structure reaching for the sky as a rebirth of Cleveland and a look to the future. The current designs are plain, boring and unimaginative!!! Can we stop acting like we have and look at what Boston did and other cities do reviving their infrastructure. This city is dying a slow death and we need something done right to revive it and look to the future. I really believe you all need to go back to the drawing board; the designs remind of a bridge on the turn pike somewhere. This is a chance to change our skyline be Cleveland, we need seize the opportunity and make it special!
 1 (0%)  
 Brides A and B are too much of what Cleveland has already had. We need something new and beautiful and Bridge C is both of those things. It respects where we have been as a city and embraces and rejoices where want to go in the future.
 1 (0%)  
 The Lighting of Bridge A fits in with other bridge lighting in the city. Bridge B is o.k. Bridge C is too modern looking and does not match with Cleveland's style.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has a subtle uncomplicated modern appearance while embracing Cleveland's industrial steel past and yet not overwhelming the incredible view of the city's skyline.   Bridge B is for boring   Bridge C  is the same as B but with a suspension component that just doesn't fit in Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 They have a nice feel, and looks as if it fits with the enviornment. I especially prefer bridge c as it looks like the 21st century
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A shows some architectural style, Bridge B is too plain, Bridge C has style and would add to the Cleveland landscape.  Would like to see more - pictures were somewhat limiting, but I liked what I saw.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is completely boring.  Bridge C looks pretty with its suspension, but with our winters, falling/melting snow and ice from the suspension above may cause traffic accidents.  This leaves bridge A as the winner.
 1 (0%)  
 While bridge C does have a bit of an iconic "wow" factor in the small cable arch feature at its east end, something we residents of Cleveland were really hoping for (in a bigger way), the rest of the bridge is BORING beyond belief. At the same time, bridge A is a much better overall look, but without any hint of an iconic arch, like in bridge C. Therefore, given no other choices, the ideal solution would be the cable arch of C coupled with the open look of bridge A. That, of course, is if there is truly no way to give our town the kind of cable stay bridge that apparently our climate won't really allow. Shame...
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is not aesthetically pleasing in any way. I really like the lighting on Bridge A, but not sure where this would best be viewed from. I like the side view of Bridge C, but while driving through it is going to seem like a waste of tax dollars to be driving through two seemingly random arches.
 1 (0%)  
 A reminds me of the current bridge with the open structure below it. B looks like a slot car track from below and C's arches just seem out of place.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B and C designs are so plain the valley. Not much to look at from the West bank bike path.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has a sleek, clean design. It fits in nicely with the Cleveland skyline. Bridge B is just plain ugly. Bridge C is cool but I'm not sure how the "wings" on the side on the bridge will fit in with the current Cleveland skyline. Need to see a 3-D model.
 1 (0%)  
 I think Bridge C is the most modern looking bridge and has a lot of character. Bridge A would be my next choice. Bridge B is more of the "same old" dreary "stuff" that Cleveland already has enough of.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A and B have no architechtual interest whatsoever. Bridge C is the only one even remotely interesting.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A's open steel construction is reminiscent on the iron and steel industry and it's contribution to Cleveland as well as the many girdered bridges in the valley. Bridge B is simply too modern and seems to say nothing. Bridge C has a nice element on the Ontario end with the arches, but those seem a bit out of place...more appropriate for San Diego than Cleveland!
 1 (0%)  
 Bridg c is the only bridge that has any character
 1 (0%)  
 The lower arched structure of bridge A bring to mind Cleveland's history as a manufacturing center, whereas the plain design of B and C do not bring much to mind at all.
 1 (0%)  
 I think the architectural lines of Bridge A are more in line with the Historical bridges of the area.
 1 (0%)  
 Designs A and B are not the "next contribution." They offer nothing distinctive. There is nothing about them that will be memorable. The arches of C are distinctive and people will remember them.
 1 (0%)  
 None of these honor Cleveland's bridge design history, nor do they contribute to the architectural history of the valley. These designs are anonymous and could be placed anywhere.
 1 (0%)  
 Looks like a bridge
 1 (0%)  
 like understructure of Bridge A and parabolic struts on Bridge C. Not inspired by bridge B
 1 (0%)  
 The use of steel in Bridge A provides a nod not only the the bridge design of the valley but also the steel industry in Cleveland. The arches on Bridge C also provide another addition but really the majority of that design, as well as Bridge B, reflect standard highway bridges without much aesthetics.
 1 (0%)  
 I believe that Bridge Design completely romanticizes and accentuates the city's natural and timeless beauty. It brings with it a vibrancy that makes Cleveland that much more desirable aesthetically. It is modern yet classic. viewing the Cleveland Skyline from this bridge would be breathtaking as it extends and invitation to passersby.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A -- Nice design. Will look pretty at night, but driving over it, its just another bridge. Eye catching if you are boating underneath it... Bridge B -- There is no character! Its just that, a bridge. Nothing stately about it. Bridge C -- Excellent design!!! This desgin will create another landmark for the city. It is stately and represents the future.
 1 (0%)  
 The aesthetics and architecture of the Innerbelt project was handled poorly by the Ohio Department of Transportation. A great opportunity to add to the identity and image of the city of Cleveland and the state of Ohio was blundered. As a resident of the city of Cleveland, I am greatly disappointed with the management of this project and the leadership of my state government.
 1 (0%)  
 I feel that bridge A reflects and compliments local architecture, would fit in nicely with any new developments that might go up and yet still stands on its own without looking too contemporary or out of place
 1 (0%)  
 I think bridge A captures both an aesthetic and structural value that would compliment the existing Cleveland skyline. While I think there is room for improvement, I don't have any thoughts on as to how I would improve the design. Bridge B seems like any other cookie-cutter bridge you might see in a modern city. Bridge C was a good attempt to add something unique to Cleveland, but don't see the need for suspension in that area and the rest of the bridge is pretty bland as well. Now something suspension over the water might fit the bill.
 1 (0%)  
 I love the way the night lighting would compliment the other bridges. Although it still has a more modern feel, the architecture does not destract from the more historical bridges either.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A looks fantastic. The steel beams bring a different design to other bridges around the country and in Ohio. The night picture with the blue brings a sense of art to Cleveland. Overall bridge A and the look will bring pride back to Cleveland and enhance the drive into Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C has a great look and will add architectual value to the region
 1 (0%)  
 Most disappointing of these bridges is how they lack to represent Cleveland and the region. The beauty of the Lorain-Carnegie bridge is how smoothly it represents what Cleveland is. Cleveland is in the midst of a rebirth. This bridge is disappointing considering the other (non-state sponsored) projects such as the new medical mart and convention center, e4th, flats, art museum, hospital expansions, and Euclid corridor. Any design, hands down, will be the most disappointing of the Cleveland Bridges and is an insult to those who designed the previous spans.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C has a fresh appearance, not what Cleveland is. We need fresh designs to make Cleveland stand out, not look the same as it always has.
 1 (0%)  
 B is beautiful, with very clean lines and yet modern
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is flat and boring. Bridge A is more attractive, but the soaring design of Bridge C is a standout and complimentary to the city.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A closly relates to the history, but also would like to see the bow string entrance bridge from design C somehow
 1 (0%)  
 Brideg C looks awesome! It makes one look twice.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is a very boring design for a city that has always been very lively.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is streamline and aesthetically pleasing.
 1 (0%)  
 I like the design of Bridge C with the suspention look however Bridge A overall has a consistent theme.
 1 (0%)  
 In the past, some of Cleveland's bridges have had the most innovative designs for their time. Design A not only come up to this standard, I feel it exceeds it.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges B and C are just plain straight concrete. C simply has an arch decoration slapped on one end where there is already visual interest in seeing Progressive Field and the Q. If the placement of the new bridges will impede upon Progressive Field, having such an arch will simply clutter an area that will already become cluttered with the presense of the bridge. Bridge A is not much better, but it atleast has a sort of simple elegance in the girder system on each pier. But it would be nice to see it a bit more pronounced.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A and Bridge C both have that something extra that makes them interesting to look at. Bridge B on the other hand is not worthy to take a picture of unlike many other bridges in Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Cleveland Bridges are mostly underspaning bridges
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge design 'A' carries a consistent theme across the entire span. Bridge design 'B' demonstrates very little elegance.
 1 (0%)  
 All three designs are uninspiring, but the curves under Bridge A are evocative of the previous bridge and provide a clean and simple design that should be relatively inexpensive to build. Bridge B is dull and says nothing about Cleveland's industrial past. Bridge C has one unique section with cables, but it's pretty limited. And what does that have to do with Cleveland's industrial heritage? I also question whether there is a potential for ice formation on those cables falling to the roadway below.
 1 (0%)  
 Most resembles the original structure. With the advent of cheaper LCD lighting I like the night time astetics.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A and Bridge B combine elements of traditional bridges with unique lighting elements. Bridge C seems to futuristic compared with the rest of the city's architecture.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C will provide a "signature structure" for pedestrians and motorists to admire. Bridge A and B do not provide this.
 1 (0%)  
 I believe that Bridge A keeps with the standing of Cleveland being a "classic" city, but a city ready to take the next step architecturally and economically. Bridge B is boring, being nothing but a regular bridge. This is not what we are looking for. Bridge C provides a little element, albeit over one street, which is boring and incomplete. If this arch were spread over the entire span, then this would be much more appealing.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges B+C are BORING. I love the underside steel work of bridge A and the nightime lighting
 1 (0%)  
 I believe Bridge A Is perfect for the city
 1 (0%)  
 A and C both have aspects that are beautiful and can inspire a lasting mental snapshot of Cleveland. Bridge B is dull and forgettable.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A and B have little aesthetic design to them at all. C is at least unique looking
 1 (0%)  
 The suspension aspect of C would contribute to a more modern Cleveland Skyline. The A bridge is also modern, but more muted.
 1 (0%)  
 The arches in Bridge C seem out of place when looking at Cleveland's bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A: The structure itself is a great design however, it's still just too simple in it's overall appearance. The night lighting effect is a plus. I do like the attempt to make the area more people/user friendly in regards to bringing the river closer to the public. Bridge B: This structure is the simplest in design and doesn't quite change what's already in place other than bringing a more structurally sound bridge to the area which in itself is what's more important however, we need an innerbelt that keeps to the area but gives enough change to show that we are ever evolving. Which brings me to Bridge C: I believe this bridge not only maintains a structure that holds true to the area but also brings an aesthetic upgrade with the arches that shows a city that is consistently evolving. It is unique in appearance similar to the Detroit/Superior bridge and yet speaks Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is the only innovative and bold design in the competition. The other two designs are somewhat to very stale and reflect the drab, current design of the existing innerbelt bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 This town needs something to define it a focal point none of these designs are that thrilling. The closest design would be 3 which has some features that could define Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A looks like it belongs here.
 1 (0%)  
 C is a landmark looking bridge - much more visually appealing to add to the skyline.
 1 (0%)  
 I like Bridge A but it seems too modern for Cleveland. The rusty drawbridge in the background really takes away from the bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is the most classical looking, but does not give a modernized appearance the city is striving for to revitalize itself. Bridge C has the most modern appears but it is something that is more fitting over a large body of water and also something that would interrupt the great city views from the bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A provides the most interest. Bridge B is boring. Bridge C is trying too hard.
 1 (0%)  
 I feel that none of the designs reflect anything out of the ordinary. They all appear to be COMMON highway bridges. This is the gateway to our city and from a driving perspective you see nothing at all but concrete - this bridge does not at all compare with any of the bridges already constructed.
 1 (0%)  
 The first bridge has the character of the other bridges of Cleveland. The second is to plain, and the third seems to try to copy St. Louis' arch
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is the BEST choice, it is an example of new architecture that we need in the region! I love it. The other two designs are nice but Bridge C just stands out. If you would like more feedback, you should put a link to Facebook on here. You would get even more feedback.
 1 (0%)  
 I really like Bridge A. It's modern and elegant.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is reminiscent of other Cleveland bridges. B is just dull. C is breathtaking (at leased the arched part; the flat, straight part would be much better done in the same style as A)
 1 (0%)  
 Why do we have to emulate our past? Why cant we have a new, fresh design? These bridges are an embarrassment to designers.
 1 (0%)  
 The bridge A images make the area under the bridge look nice, but who want's to hang out under a giant bridge? The bridge itself looks nice but it shows traffic going in both directions and I though we were only making a westbound bridge? Bridge C looks cool but doesn't show what it would look like next to the existing bridge. Bridge B just looks dull.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is standard Interstate highway design used for 55 years. Bridge A is a Soviet-style attempt at adding archittectural detail to an otherwise derivative 60's highway design. Bridge C is the only aesthetically pleasing design, that stretches the imagination, and carries Cleveland's rich architectural bridge history into a new century.
 1 (0%)  
 C distracts from the current skyline of cleveland b is boring A brings interest and unique without being overwhelming
 1 (0%)  
 I see these as generic spans. They speak more about the money that the state doesn't have rather than the creative and civil genious this state and city do have.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A provides a very clean look that fits in well with the other Cleveland architecture. Brigde B looks like a standard bridge with no impact. Bridge C is very stylish, but it a little too futuristic for the rest of the Cleveland look and feel.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge C has more modern / futuristic looking theme.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C arches will detract from the view of the city skyline. Bridge A has the structure similar to the Hope Bridge and Maine ave bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has the open design elements that readily compliment the wide variety of bridges scattered throughout the city and will connect the old designs with the new one.
 1 (0%)  
 I like the open feel of the triangular supports on bridge A and I like the arched cable stay design of Bridge C. I think a combination of designs would be perfect
 1 (0%)  
 It's new and unique, something that a city of bridges does not have. The other two designs are just cookie cutter booring.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A's openness reflects more of the steel beam look of many of the bridges in and around downtown. It also adds a lightness to the design as well as giving it a more modern, updated look to the overall design.
 1 (0%)  
 It doesn't fit the city's new modern population and redesigned streets!
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is amazing, it is a work of art like the city itself
 1 (0%)  
 I believe the bridge should be stable and also have a nice look, Bridge a and c have a really nice look and look more stable.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C has wonderful lines and structural designs. It truly represents Cleveland for its future redevelopment of our downtown area. I do love the blue lights on A and B
 1 (0%)  
 A is a very modern classy design...respects Cleve. History B is just plain and ugly C does not fit with our towns "look" should be build in LA
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is the best design. A & B look like what's already there; boring and not modern. C is interesting, contemporary and a perfect addition to our limited skyline.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is distinctive, and many people see the bridge from the side and from under. Since building high is not practical, it gives the best view of the bridge. Design C has flair, but only on 1 small approach bridge, and the rest would be plain. Bridge B is just dull.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has a underdeck design that fits with the older 'industrial' bridges that exist now in the area. Bridge B is BORING! Bridge C has a wonderful idea in the arches but the concept appears to be limited to one approach and the remainder of the deck and support design is BORING.
 1 (0%)  
 While I have to assume each design is equally structurally sound, aesthetically Bridge C is the most striking and could be a focal point of interest to visitors and citizens alike
 1 (0%)  
 The intracacy of the truss work on Bridge A makes a creative design statement and best allies itself to Cleveland's industrial hisotry as well as its bridge building accomplishments. Bridge C has its merits. While arched section is certainly interesting, the majority of the span looks as anonymous as the traditional highway overpass. Bridge B, although slender and streamlined, just seems rather anonymous.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is just so much more beautiful than the others, and would add quite a bit to the beautiful Cleveland skyline
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A gives a sleek all around look on both ends, unlike the other two.
 1 (0%)  
 All the designs are terrible, and fall short of the signature bridge we need. Bridge B, however, at least incorporates a little bit of elegance in the way the columns connect to the underside of the bridge that is vaguely reminiscent of some of the historic bridges
 1 (0%)  
 None of these bridge designs blow me away. They are not as ambitious as the new bridge in Toledo and appear a bit bland. Cleveland deserves better.
 1 (0%)  
 BRIDGE C WILL BE VIEW FROM A DISTANCE
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A meshes nicely with the rich architectural history of Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 I think all of them meet the criteria - but only one of them extends the rich history to add something NEW.
 1 (0%)  
 A: With recent bridge problems, the triangular trusses hints insecurity. B: Architecturally blant. Looks to similar to the current one. C: Nice futuristic design
 1 (0%)  
 its expounds on the rich industrial cleveland history through the engineering past, present, and future. it also brings cleveland a landmark needed to show we can provide plesant design prospects that say we are still moving .
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is very boring.
 1 (0%)  
 Although C looks best, it doesn't seem to meet the criteria of similarity
 1 (0%)  
 Want to pick Bridge C because of the potential architectural 'height' it could provide to the landscape. But the rest of the bridge is plain. Can you combine A and C
 1 (0%)  
 A simple yet visually appealing design that enhances the landscape.
 1 (0%)  
 I love the architecture, the lighting, the curves and the entire look and feel of this design. It is my favorite. It is also very classic and has a true presence.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is very graceful and will really make an impact on the city fabric.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A seems most asthetically pleasing without impeding view of downtown. Would make me proud to be in Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C provides a new and exciting view of the city. Cleveland is ready for change. Let's use the Interbelt Bridge as our first step.
 1 (0%)  
 The under structure is the most interesting and fits the period of Cleveland architecture. A combination of the two bridges would have a more interesting feel with interest to the driver on the bridge and to those who are under the bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is aesthetically pleasing and would be a distinctive design complementing the city. We need more forward-thinking designs! Bridge B is the most banal design presented -- there is no visual interest in its concept. It looks like most bridges constructed throughout the US. Bridge A is only slightly more interesting than B...
 1 (0%)  
 bridge C looks to much like the st. louis ache bridge B is too plain
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C follows the Rock 'N Roll Hall of Fame, but the arches may block views of Downtown Cleveland Skyline. Bridge A provides lights under the bridge at night to be seen for miles and does not obstruct the skyline. Bridge B does not seem to fit with the new designed architecture of Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is so typical and boring. I would look upon this bridge as a let down to our city. Bridge B I s very modern and sleek. Bridge C is exciting and will be a new landmark for our great city.
 1 (0%)  
  innovative
 1 (0%)  
 C looks like a meager attempt to create a bridege like the one at Tampa Bay. B is too plain and lacking in a connection to the city and to the people.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has clean sharp lines and is visually interesting.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges B&C are much the same except for the arch on C. Plain Jane stuff. Bridge C copies the designs many other newer bridges. Bridge A is a neat clean design that complements the history of the area, bridges that came before it, and provides unobstructed views of the city
 1 (0%)  
 I feel that bridge A most represents the current architecture of the surrounding bridges however combined with bridge C could carry clevelands bridge architecture into the future!
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A gives a "nod" to the past bridges through some of the detail in its supports. I see little, if anything, in the design of the other two that reflect our rich history.
 1 (0%)  
 It looks sleek and modern.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A will compliment the existing valley bridges. You have your arch truss in Main Avenue, sweeping arch in Detroit/Superior, concrete arch/straight truss in Hope Memorial and adding a triangular truss would contrast yet compliment the other designs.
 1 (0%)  
 Along the Cuyahoga, Cleveland is a treasure trove of bridges. I believe that Bridge C most effectively includes the architectural history & introduces a somewhat new aesthetic representing the future.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is a very nice looking designed bridge with grassy areas underneath. Bridge B is very plain. As for bridge C, the arches are only by Progressive field and the rest of the bridge is plain.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A represents Cleveland's rich steel industry with the steel arches throughout the bridge. The bridge also serves as "symbolic bridge" as it links past and future architecture.
 1 (0%)  
 Unique in design looks great lit up at night.
 1 (0%)  
 Neither the standard bridge design (b) or the looped bridge (c) reflect Cleveland values. In addition, the looped bridge loop may drop ice on anything below at that piont.
 1 (0%)  
 the arch design visible above the road surface mirrors the Detroit/Superior bridge.Very nice.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is a perfect example of a modern take on the classic steel structural bridge. Bridge B has very clean lines but does nothing for this particular aspect of the survey. Bridge C is very modern and stylish but again, doesn't meet the criteria outlined in this question.
 1 (0%)  
 Both bridges reflect the past main bridgesand bldgs. They also represent the youthfull look that many bridges and bldgs. have in and around Cleveland, Strong and usefull.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C presents a new chapter in the architectural history and will give Cleveland a unique bridge that will be talked about positively.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is capable of giving newcomers into cleveland a glimpse of a new modern and up and coming thriving city. Bridge A has features that is shared with other bridges in the area. Bridge B is too industrial...
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C with those arches in the middle and lighted at night will help highlight the city and be seen from a distance and will inhance our skyline. It will make us like we are finally moving into the future! Bridge A ...The only part I like is the underside and how it will be lite in blue at night but other than that it is just a flat plain bridge .
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is the only option. Bridges A and B are the same old boring design as so many other bridges. It is time for Cleveland to have something modern and iconic. Look at the new bridge Columbus built. It's amazing. Cleveland needs to compete.
 1 (0%)  
 ?????
 1 (0%)  
 I think that bridge A is very attractive and will last a long time because it looks like a very strong bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 The design of Bridge A pays homage to the historical aesthetics of all the other bridges in the valley. The visible steel trusses reflect the design of nearly every other bridge in some way, but add a sleek, modernized rendering to the composition.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A goes along with the past bridges with the many arches
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is the only bridge thatt has any distiguishing charactaristics. This bridge could define our city like Charleston, SC or Boston or San Francisco
 1 (0%)  
 I like A the best.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is beautiful!!!
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B has no pizzazz, the only thing I like about it is that east & west lanes are separated.
 1 (0%)  
 There's noting to Bridge B; Bridge A has some interest, but falls short. Bridge C has potential, although I'd have to see more of it.
 1 (0%)  
 I don't think following the past is in Cleveland's best interest. Cleveland is a mixture of past, present, and future, and our architecture should reflect this.
 1 (0%)  
 I don't think this question should effect the design. It should be more about new progress, a new beginning, a new future.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is by far he best. It includes Clevelands steel history, adds visual appeal to the skyline, and the arches add a wonderful dramatic flair. People driving in will have an awesome impression of the city. It adds to the list of wonderful things our city has to offer!! Bridge A Meets the steel history, and ads some visual appeal, but there is nothing that really makes Cleveland stand out about it like Bridge C. Plus, there's nothing cool for the drivers to see. Bridge B is plain and doesn't add any visual appeal to the skyline.
 1 (0%)  
 The designs all seem to be similar to the most boring bridges we already have (except for the one that looks like a cage). New construction should reflect rich bridge architectual history? Then the bridge should be unique and not look like the one that it will replace.
 1 (0%)  
 I would state if we are to do this thing right. Lets get the beautification of the city going here. The suspension bridge for C looks great and shows creativeness of the city. The other highlights of this bridge will provide great long lasting aesthtics such as those shown with the Golden Gate Bridge in San Fran.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C has the modern look the city desperately needs to enhance the Downtown Skyline.
 1 (0%)  
 the design of bridge meets the architecture of our other bridges but has a freer and more updated flair. further i feel bridge a fills the space better than the other 2 do
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C would do well, it shares similarities with the other bridge, and it gives a distinct entry way into the city, something I believe the city lacks.
 1 (0%)  
 I feel the arches in Bridge C is very "rich" looking
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is the BEST design will give Cleveland a long awaited face lift & make the design of the downtown area move modern & sleek looking!
 1 (0%)  
 Something BOLD is required as a gateway to the city. Proposal B is awful. C would frame the city and would be a nice gateway to the city.
 1 (0%)  
 I really like the plan for Bridge C - it's modern and different. Plan A and B look like how the bridge looks like right now.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge "C" is not only a bridge, but adds some form to the function.
 1 (0%)  
 LOve the arches. The bridge is a huge part of the city and it should stand out build this one. I have one drawn up to that would be nice more brick and wider supports more dominate visually. Any word on a message board? every other major city has one.
 1 (0%)  
 the bridge should be an architectural jewel and showcase the downtown skyline.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B looks too much like the I 480 design: blah! I wish we could combine the bridge C design arches with the bridge A overall structure.
 1 (0%)  
 Option C is the Perfect shape, but even better if it lit up!!!
 1 (0%)  
 This design for bridge A will bring us forward to showcase the whole look of the city in a very positive manner. Bridge B is ok but just looks to bland. Bridge C is just too way out non appealing bad form.I dont think you need the arch it looks out of place!
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is far too simple. It adds no aesthetic value at all. Bridge C looks amazing and is a step into the modern age of architecture. Bridge A just looks average and seems average architecturally.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B appears to be a mundane, anonymous bridge similar to those found anywhere in the country, aside from the few from underneath, which comparatively few people will be able to see. I
 1 (0%)  
 It looks futuristic
 1 (0%)  
 I liked and prefer the conceptual artist rendering/drawing of Bridge A. The "V" shaped trussels represent to me passage of time past, present and future; additionaly how its bulit over water, green space with industry on one side and urban living on the oppsite side. We as Clevelanders would be able to tell our childerns / grandchildrens the rich history of how #1 (PAST): industrial, waterway helped bulit this great region #2 (PRESENT): conserving and protecting our watershed, and enviorment. #3 (FUTURE): by using renewable energy such as the turbine farm that will be built out in Lake Erie, will help power the light poles on and around the new innerblet bridge. Teaching our kids how to conserve, honor, protect, resuse our natural resources is just like "the emerald necklace" its the bridge that ties all this together. All this while enjoying the parks under the NEW INNERBELT BRIDGE"A"
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A best reflects both the past & the future while being particularly respectful of the sensitivity future generations need to pay to monitoring the underbellies of our infrastructure, while also venerating the valley...love it. Turning function into beauty while lighting the bridge from underneath. Simple, classic, functional while offering beauty without pandering to popular bridge design elements. We don't need anything that looks like a half baked copy of a bridge in a nearby city. We need our own style.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is forward looking and a great addition to Cleveland's bridge design history.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is a beautiful structure, very sleek, and certainly enhances the appearance of the area.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has a modern look while still remaining in sync with cleveland. Bridge B is too similar to other bridges in cleveland but in a negative way and will look old within a decade. Bridge C is nice with the arcs but the blue metal will look old within a decade.
 1 (0%)  
 Both B and C look horrible. The suspension bridge idea seems only to satisfy the Dolans to make Progressive field look like it's in an upscale location than it really is. I see like no reason for it to be there. Neither fits in with all the other bridges around it. Bridge B might be a nice bridge, for Valley View area but not Cleveland. My initial reaction to the Bridge A design was "How the hell did they come up with that? It's like a modern design take from all of the other bridges we have. It fits so well with all of the other bridges surrounding it. Like it was always supposed to be there. Amazing. Has nice arching detail to it without messing up the nice close view we have of downtown Cleveland. And the lighting at night is incredible as well. So my choice is Bridge A for sure.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A does not look like a bridge from any other city. Bridge C is nice but that style and design has been used in other cities. We need a bridge that is unique to us and only us.
 1 (0%)  
 I believe that our bridge should be as eye catching and pleasing to look at as Toledo's I-280 bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B and C are too modern for the City of Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 I believe bridge A is a better choice for the type of weather Cleveland has, is beautiful in design and sturdy.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A - modern, nice use of steel, but uninspiring and similar to current bridge. Bridge B - looks like a copy of a 1970's Los Angeles highway bridge - think "CHiPS" Bridge C - dramatic use of steel, adds to the cityscape, does not disappear like A & B.
 1 (0%)  
 These bridges are thoroughly modern, and rightly so.
 1 (0%)  
 Picture A is very nice but a plain
 1 (0%)  
 the 2 arms raised over bridge C lets me no that Cleveland is a safe place to come to.
 1 (0%)  
 it would be nice to build bridge A with bridge C tall rallings
 1 (0%)  
 The only bridge with any kind of interesting architectural detail is Bridge C, even if it's only a small amount of detail. It's the only one that even begins to "contribute to the rich bridge architectural history" that is part of the criteria. The other two designs are completely bland and boring.
 1 (0%)  
 i like the arches and floating concept of Bridge C
 1 (0%)  
 Significant lack of design in all 3 are sad reminders of the value of short term money pressure. None of these bridges could be considered inspired. Constrained is a better word. What other criteria were given in contrast with the above to cause such a smothered and dull collection of urban utility?
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge "A" not only links the East and West side but is also links the past "Blue Collar" with the Future "White Collar".
 1 (0%)  
 All in all, its not a very impressive trio to choose from. Design A looks as if the designers have tried to infuse some of the required aesthetic. It's open support design can be roughly but respectfully reflective of the support features of the other cross valley bridges. The texture of the look also mirrors the visual texture of Cleveland's industrial engineering base. At least the aesthetic is quite compatible with the setting. I would have liked to seen just a little bit more to it, but it is certainly going down the righ path. Design B has minimalist aesthetic and minimalism is wholey inappropriate for a massive mile long structure in the city's industrial front yard. I mean, are we trying to hide it? Design C has an interesting feature but that feature looks quite out of place and serves no purpose other than to break up monotony. The rest of the bridge is as boring as it gets and the wire sling feature more closely resembles Florida Gulf 1970's design aesthetic than any reflection of Clevelands industrial base.
 1 (0%)  
 I believe that the style of Bridge A fits best with Cleveland's skyline. It has the feel of some of our other bridges in town, but is updated and more airy. Alternate C is my second choice but looks too close to Toledo's 280 bridge. I think Alternate B is ugly and just looks like a regular bridge without any style - also this bridge B looks terrible at night.....
 1 (0%)  
 I think if we are paying homage to Cleveland's industrial past, then we are going to miss the mark. Cleveland needs something 'new' and we are always being inspired by the past and not by the future, then we will always be 1 step behind the rest of the country.
 1 (0%)  
 I would think that Bridge A stucture could have structural issues with shifting like the current bridge. Bridge B would not have the issues.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A looks great from all angles. The other two look plain from far away...too sleak. All three do look great at night with lights.
 1 (0%)  
 The Mcdonalds arch in bridge c does not meet the rich industrial architectural history. Bridge A Exceeds this criteria.
 1 (0%)  
 A looks like a modern day replacement of the existing. B looks to be too long on the spans to me, no arcitectural look at all...BORING! C is beautiful BUT, I see maintenace nightmares (taffic nightmares while the work takes place!) every 5 years or so.
 1 (0%)  
 I found all 3 bridge designs to be generic and not at all representative of Cleveland. They could be found in any city- old or new and are not nearly as interesting as the existing bridges that currently stand near downtown Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Design reflects other established bridge/architecture in downtown area. Aestically pleasing. Steel and concrete (if used) also reflect use of area resources.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C to me clearly presses the aesthetic of the city in a forward thinking direction. Which I feel Cleveland needs.
 1 (0%)  
 Of the three proposed designs, bridge C's dramatic arc offers a bold interpretation of the area's complex history. Designs A and C look like every other bridge built over the last fifty years in this area.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C, my choice, evokes a modern forward looking design and is the only one apparent from the roadway. Bridge B is sleek but plain. And Bridge A is just too industrial dragging one into a past Cleveland will never again experience.
 1 (0%)  
 Of the three proposed designs, bridge C's dramatic arc offers a bold interpretation of the area's complex history. Designs A and B look like every other bridge built over the last fifty years in this area.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is structural nonsense---or engineering stupidity. Ask any Civil Engineer: In CE101 his common sense was supplemented by book-learning demonstrating that sort of arching can only fail, soon and quickly, likely first splitting at the root, during construction. Those arches are expected to constantly carry both tension and compression loads---extreme loads---no way, Jose.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is the only one that goes outside the box in terms of aesthetic. Cleveland needs new thinking, and this bridge may inspire some.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A and B seem "bland"; there is no "wow" factor. I rated them as meeting criteria because I guess they don't detract any from the aesthetics of the area. Bridge C seems radically different, but there are examples all over Cleveland of "new and different" blending well with "old and traditional".
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has lovely details and compliments Clevelan's skyline. Bridge B is too bland and Bridge C's arches compete too much with the skyline. Bridge A would be gorgeous.
 1 (0%)  
 I am shocked that these are the best designs that the teams could come up with. Its sad that once again Cleveland will lose out on a great opportunity to improve where we live and work.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge c would enhance the skyline of downtown from the incoming westside and tremont. The view of the current bridge and downtown from University Ave. is one of the most photograghed panoramas of cleveland. Bridge a and b just do not live up to the current bridge in design.
 1 (0%)  
 A is interesting and classic, good lighting B is boring C is boring over the viaduct but has a great arch
 1 (0%)  
 Cleveland needs something striking downtown besides jus the buildings. Terminal Tower was put to the background with the BP building and Society building and we need something for the future, something different that just a plain bridge. I think Bridge C would be something for people to say "wow, what an awesome skyline".
 1 (0%)  
 I'm torn between "A" and "C". I like the clean lines and dramatic lighting of "A" but I also like the design of "C". I would be happy with either design. If I had to pick one design I would go with "C".
 1 (0%)  
 we can use a bridge with the arches to add to the city view. we have nothing like that now and a lot of cities that we have traveled to and through, have a bridge that looks similar to this, but not as simple as this.
 1 (0%)  
 The downtown skyline is preserved with this design.
 1 (0%)  
 From the provided PDFs, it is confusing as to what is the plan; will the old bridge stay? or is it still undecided? EXAMPLE: In the pictures for Bridge B, one picture shows two new bridges and one picture shows one bridge along side the old bridge. Which is it? Bridge B and C look exactly the same, except for the arches in C. But what are the arches for? It seems the arches don't even span the length of the bridge, just the small section next to Progressive field.
 1 (0%)  
 A has good architectural design, simple yet elegant. C has a uniqueness with the Arches but the rest is too plain. B is very industrial but doesn't seem to show the creativty of Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A and B are similar to other bridges in the downtown area, particularly the Detroit Superior bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Of the three, it is more aesthetic. However, all three are boring....typical ODOT committee. A camel is a horse put together with a committee. Boston has a fabulous bridge over the Charles River.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is a beautiful design; Bridge C also offers a beautiful design feature with the arch addition, but the bridge deck lacks style. I would look at combining the bridge deck design from A and add the arches from C for the best combination.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A: has an overall aesthetic continuity. Bridge C: the arch on this one plays into some of the other bridge styles that are downtown but the rest of it seems on the boring side. Bridge B: there seems to be nothing unique on this bridge it looks like most other bridges in Ohio.
 1 (0%)  
 A 60 year resident of my strong city & would love a beautiful bridge to make folks want to drive downtown or I-90 E & W, The other 2 are just bridges with no excitement as we do not see driving what the bottom has. But C has it all!
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is visually more appealing if you think of a biker on the towpath passing under the bridge. It is also has lights like our other bridges. It ties in well.
 1 (0%)  
 Love the aeshetic of Bridge A and C. Very Cool!
 1 (0%)  
 Cleveland *does* have a rich history of bridge architecture and none of these bridges will complement or enhance our downtown atmosphere. Two of the bridges - A and B - are barely distinguishable and neither appealing (though if I had to rank them, A would trump B). Bridge C is barely better, but it looks as if Cleveland is trying to copy other cities' bridges and architecture (it looks like two miniature St. Louis arches haphazardly thrown on top of a bridge). We can surely find a design that is uniquely Cleveland and enhances our city's historical architecture. If you want to build one of these bridges, build them in a city without the rich history and beautiful bridge infrastructure of Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C presents a very artistic approach to the bridge design which I believe reflects the rich arts and ethnic diversity of Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 The Cleveland skyline desperately needs new/unique features, and bridge C comes the closest. Though I would like to see some aesthetic tweaks to the suspension structure to give Cleveland something truly unique, apart from other arch suspension structures in other cities.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is reminiscent of the existing inner-belt bridge - but done in a more streamlined and contemporary design. Bridge B is non-existent...blending in with the surroundings it makes no statement at all. Bridge C instantly made me think about the arch of bridges and how that is part of Cleveland - bringing to mind the architectural history before I read your question.
 1 (0%)  
 Love the arches. Adds greatly to the view of the valley.
 1 (0%)  
 A and B are too mundane and cheap looking, could very well have been drawn by a middle school child. (no great features or imagination. We deserve something that people will talk about, for instance the sunshine skyline bridge @ Tampa St Petersburg. or Alamillo bridge in Seville Spain. Please give us something to be proud of, not just a concrete and steel roadway. How about a world class structure, not same old same old
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C matches the architecture of Progressive Field with the 2 arches and other downtown buildings. This is a great bridge design, however the remaining bridge archtecture is "plain Jane" and looks like the rest of the boring ODOT bridges in the state. Bridge B should not even be considered because it is basically the same bridges ODOT designs and builds throughout the state - boring and ugly. The only thing Bridge B offers different from the rest of ODOT boring bridges is the use of what appears to be concrete beam spans instead of steel. If I remember correctly, this is basically a Pennsylvania DOT bridge design (they use concrete beams instead of steel). Bridge A is a fantastic design like Bridge C. What an imagination for the beams!!!! And the lights at night are just amazing!!!. Bridge C also looks beautiful at night, but only at the E.9th overpass where the 2 arches are planned. The rest of Bridge C is boring at night and will not showcase the bridge from below in the parks and Flats. However, for as beautiful as the Bridge A design is from underneath, it does not offer anything "above" where 95% of the population will see it. Bridge C will offer the cool looking arches for 95% of drivers to see including people from other states driving through Cleveland or people visiting Progressive Field and/or the "Q".
 1 (0%)  
 C is the best design of the three by far. The other two add nothing interesting to the Cleveland skyline at all. A and B are boring... We need something that is unique and impressionable and C is the only one close to accomplishing this.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is a stunning modern translation of the architectural heritage of downtown Cleveland, blending structural steel with clean design. Bridge B is completely devoid of character and would bring zero aesthetic value. Bridge C is a nice design but the arch and cable design does not resonate with Cleveland's historical designs.
 1 (0%)  
 I agree with the PD critic for the most part. There is little imagination shown in these designs. It does not set us apart, nor are any of the designs iconic in the sense that they will draw national attention.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has an arch foundation design which provides some interest. Bridge B is 'plain jane' with no aesthetic interest. Bridge C offers an interesting above arch which has the most striking design. Combined with Bridge A foundation, I would think this would offer the best of both worlds. The bridge leading to Savannah from So. Carolina is exceedingly striking. It is a bridge to be remembered and provides a great view of their city.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C will stand and is striking enough to become an integral part of Cleveland's landscape
 1 (0%)  
 What general Clevelander is going to know the "civic, industrial and bridge design history"? That's a silly question...
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge a - seems to resemble an updated version of an earlier style. bridge b - is a bridge, but does not contribute to a rich architectural style. Bridge c - I Like the modern look of the arches. I feel where the arches will be located will take away from the downtown architecture by obstructing views of the gateway district.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge a = classy ass design bridge b = boring bridge c = boring with a little fluff.
 1 (0%)  
 I prefer the look of the Lorain Carnegie bridge with buttress's above the roadway. That is why I prefer C. A is more interesting then B underneath. Unfortunately the area above the bridge is what makes the statement.
 1 (0%)  
 the cleveland skyline is pleasonly older and should be shown off not hidden
 1 (0%)  
 Having come from a family of Bridge builders from many years ago I must say that the design of Bridge A is superior in design to the others.
 1 (0%)  
 I don't believe that respecting the aesthetic history is the main objective of any bridge. The main objective is transportation with safety and without delays.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge design A most closely emulates the previous style of Cleveland infrastructure with its more complex design verses the simpler design of the other proposals.
 1 (0%)  
 Steven Litt hit the nail on the head this morning in the PD when he said that none of the three designs are inspiring or creative. However, that said, Bridge A is the only one that shows any flair at all. The picture of the cable arches shown above for Bridge C are totally misleading - in actuality, the arches will look exactly like they are - last minute add ons with no function other than to influence the public perception. Some of the pictures above do that, suggesting that the arches would be pervasive in the design. They clearly are not, pertaining to only a very small portion of the total bridge length.Otherwise, Bridge C is about as inspiring as a blank wall.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A and B have no character at all. Boring!
 1 (0%)  
 I see no design presented here that captures any sense of Cleveland's history, especially design B. Just look at the current bridges in Cleveland now with unique designs featuring arches and Art Deco elements.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A's continuous arches best symbolize strength, a core value when I think about Cleveland's heritage.
 1 (0%)  
 If I could combine the cable-arch over the Ontario Street on bridge "C" and put it on the bridge "A" design, you would have a win-win. "C" alone offers nothing from the valley floor or to the city skyline aesthetically.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A provides for an updated, modern bridge design while still preserving the wide open view of the Cuyahoga River Valley as you approach Cleveland. You are able to see the many bridges and buildings that are a part of Cleveland's history. Bridge B is too simple and doesn't provide for a new architectural talking point for the city. Bridge C and it's interesting arched span across what appears to be Broadway interferes too much with Progressive field. Beautiful as it is the arch such as the one proposed are better served in an open area where it can be the center piece of a structure.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B has no imagination or aesthetic sense...just plain ugly and a dual span nightmare. Bridge C looks good near the ballpark and is kind of interesting, but the rest of it fails in my eyes. Bridge A is by far the most outstanding proposition. It looks good and reflects the heritage of our city best.
 1 (0%)  
 The only reason I consider Bridge C to meet criteria is the cable arch. The rest of the bridge design seems uninspired. However, if the open beam design of Bridge A could be combined with the cable arch it could be an outstanding design.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge "B" looks like it would put too much pressure on the concrete towers. Bridge "C" Also look like it would do the same, also those things sticking up on the sides looks goofy.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is quite boring. The other two bridges are beautiful, and aesthetically pleasing. I drive I-90 every day, and prefer Bridge C.
 2 (0%)  
 I really like the design of Bridge A, you can see the city sky line as you are coming and going into downtown, don't want to take that away. I like the design of the bottom with the lights at night and it's shape.
 1 (0%)  
 Shows innovation that should reflect northeast Ohio.
 1 (0%)  
 Being from Mentor, I think that Bridge C will stand out the most and really draw attention to it. Bridge A looks better during the night picture that has been proposed. I think Bridge B is a boring un-attracitve design. Since this bridge is so importnat to Cleveland and the traveling to many other places surrounding the city, I think that the bridge should have a fun aspect to it, meaning the look of it. Bridge B is boring and it is unattractive to me. This looks like something you would see in an airport and a tram would take you to a car rental station. I dont, personaly, like this proposed Bridge. I think C is the most artistic and interesting to look at and A is nice looking as well but probably will not attract the eye as much as Bridge C.
 1 (0%)  
 B is boring and is not in context. C has a cute little ditty on the end but 90% is boring and not in context. A flows nicely and is in context.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C stands out. When people look at it. You that is Cleveland,Ohio!
 1 (0%)  
 It bridges the gap between the existing bridge structure to that of the future with a design that represents the strength and potential embodied in the great city of Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 A is clean, modern and arched nicely where lighting would be nice B is very streamline but a bit boring C I'm not fond of arches rising up. It takes away from the skyline view.
 1 (0%)  
 pleasing to look at without being bland or overboard. will provide a safe way into the city.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A seems to show Cleveland's classy appeal rather than that of Bridge B and C. Bridges B and C look more like its a show off. You want to represent Cleveland for what it is, Classy. We are not show offs and are not "wanna-be's". I think Bridge A successfully shows Cleveland's taste and city.
 1 (0%)  
 Becoming a "modern" city involves taking risks...like building a unusual new building like the Peter B. Lewis Law building at University Circle, or an awesome new Modern Art Museum. In this time when money is tight, I think Bridge C does a great job of balancing both smart use of our money and a brave FORWARD step in design for Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is by far the bridge I would rather see everyday. Bridge B looks a little to similar to the valley view bridge,why would you want to have such a similiar bridge in downtown. Bridge C does not even reflect anything that it is around and should be the last choice in downtown.
 1 (0%)  
 All three proposals lack any kind of creative element. They appear as though they were drawn up from any other ODOT bridge project. Boring and dull. Hardly the kind of "signature" bridge that was being discussed at the beginning of this project. Thoroughly disappointing.
 1 (0%)  
 The structure A bridge seems well design; it is elegantly built and has a unique dispaly in the evening time that is simply beautiful. When I fly in to Cleveland in the evening the topography is beautiful and to sse the bridge reflecting the illumination when set Cleveland and Cuyahoga off with Awe. Structure B is very mondain in the design of the structure and does not appear to be sturdy to endure longevity of wear and tear. Structure C seems to be a sound structure; however there is nothing unique about the design it has many similiarities of other bridges across the States.
 1 (0%)  
 They all meet the criteria
 1 (0%)  
 Although clean in design, bridge b is TOO simple for a city as vibrant as Cleveland, while the flairs of bridge c takeaway from the skyline, as well as create potential unknown issues for future development as far as air space needed.
 1 (0%)  
 None of the designs reflects Cleveland's "rich bridge architectural history of the valley." What a huge disappointment. Just another Cleveland joke. Why does ODOT always treat Cleveland & northeast Ohio as the "red-headed stepchild" of the state? Why aren't there design alternatives available for the Innerbelt Bridge similar to those design alternatives offered for the Brent Spence Bridge Corridor Project in Cincinnati? For those interested, check out www.brentspencebridgecorridor.com.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C appears must safer to drive on and much well balanced and sturdy.
 1 (0%)  
 Don't see any 'Design' in most of these pictures, most look like a new version of what we already have.
 1 (0%)  
 a-looks sturdy, like it would do the job, like a clevelander b-looks way to plain, could be built anywhere c-linda looks like the bridge in Boston--eeewww
 1 (0%)  
 Both A and B have clean nice lines, either would be an assect, but C has such a great look and feel, unique, modern, and clean.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is a progress comparing to the standard old designs
 1 (0%)  
 There is nothing imaginative or exciting about any of the designs. It reflects the same deteriorating image of Cleveland that the community is trying to turn around. There is no design risk or "wow" factor. The architects should be ashamed of themselves for their designs.
 1 (0%)  
 While the arches of Bridge C are cool, the rest of the bridge falls flat. Bridge A is modern, complete, and looks solid from start to finish. Plus the artist rendering the background for A get props -- it looks realistic. The artist rendering the background for C was totally lazy. Have they ever seen Cleveland?
 1 (0%)  
 The arches on C are a attempt to cheap what could be a signature bridge for the City. The sweeping sail like superstructure in early concept drawing is what should be progressing. If this were in Columbus or some powerful rural legislure's districh no expense would be spared
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is the only bridge that has aesthetic beauty when viewed from the cuyahoga river, both day and night. When I think of the city of bridges. I think of the view that one would see from the flats (EAST & West Bank), from the boats (Nautica & Goodtime III) and from Tremont and the city. Cleveland needs to expand that view from all of these focal points in order to resurrect the re-birth of this city, ie rebuilding the EAST bank of the flats and the new casino. If we have any hope of revitalizing this city we need to make sure that this bridge brings attention and investment back into our "cleveland's" back yard. Bridge A provides a solid steel structure reminscent of the industrial age and the under bridge lighting creates a futuristic style, but I feel that it is missing something above deck. Maybe just some futuristic decorative wrought iron street lamps would give it some height to make it more distinguishable.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has nice sleek lines and seems to complment downtown.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is similar to other bridges (main avenue). B looks like any generic freeway overpass, as does most of C.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is pretty neat with the triangles and the blue lights and such. Bridge B is a carbon copy of every other highway bridge that I have seen. Although it may be the cheapest and most efficient choice, it should not be considered too heavily because.... Bridge C is an excellant design that would really spice up Cleveland. Spend the extra money and choose Bridge C.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge C is a good design, highlights the bridge and the skyline
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is pure class and an Urban style. It looks great day and night!
 1 (0%)  
 None of the bridges meet this criteria. Bridge A is marginal, but only because it is the least unacceptable of the 3
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A amd B look very simple and similar to the current bridge. Bridge C has more design and character.
 1 (0%)  
 I love the bridge in Toledo, OH and this looks just like it.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is more modern and will help to give a modern look to the city - something which is a necessary contribution to the revitalization of this city.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A looks like a Cleveland bridge with its heavy geometric designed arches under the bridge. The night shot of Bridge B reminds me of a moonlight night on the water.
 1 (0%)  
 The steel work complements the Lorain-Carnegie bridge with it's ironwork. The design steel has a graceful yet powerful strength to it.
 1 (0%)  
 All three designs are very drab and do not compare to Cleveland's rich history in bridges. Bridges b and c are absolutely unacceptable. The bridge a design is closest to doing something different, but it lacks any architectural thought as well. For a project of this magnitude, that will shape the Cleveland skyline for years to come, odot and the designers should be embarrassed by these plain and thoughtless designs.
 1 (0%)  
 I like the sweeping arches but it needs something above deck to set it apart. Bridge C is interesting but looks forlorn with just the two upper arches that do not do any thing but look strange.
 1 (0%)  
 1) clean,streamlined enough,etc.Folks JUST concerned w/gettin it done...GONNA take LOT more then a bridge to whutever..OLD one looked pretty good..FINALLY..does what it does...WE aint Chicago,vancouver,etc.etc. SURE SOME*$@*X goin on bout Cleveland n wayz to *$*@ said n make *$*@ Jackson,Gilbert&rest look like *4*@....
 1 (0%)  
 bridge b appears to not have enough safety siding on top for cars.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has the graxefull lighted arches that remind me of the beautiful Detroit Superior Bridge. Bridge B is uninspiring. Bridge C is out there & rerally not that special
 1 (0%)  
 I like the lighting, it complements the other bridges downtown
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is very classy.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is an eyeful of wonder and accomplishment. They are all nice but C is my favorite for a "smart impression"
 1 (0%)  
 If the city is to shake its image of a "rust belt"city, A futuristic design is needed. The other designs are too much like the "same 'ol - same 'ol" design
 1 (0%)  
 Cleveland's architecture is rooted in Modernism and art deco. Modern architecture isn't one would think of contemporary sleek modern. Modern is the use of dark metal and square forms. Art deco is the more old Hollywood or Chrysler building type architecture. While bridges B and C bring none of that bridge A might bring it in the 3 lines in each column which are the only classic feature. I like how that feature brings the old together with the new (the pylons on top of that column). However I think it could use one more ornate (art deco) or one more modern architectural element to put it in the "meets criteria" category, like a more art deco cement railing (but simple)
 1 (0%)  
 I like bridge c the best.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is interesting, but honestly a little too much for Cleveland with the "wings". Bridge B is boring beyond belief. Bridge A has a likable character to it. It has a little bit of an edge to it, but not over the top like Bridge C.
 1 (0%)  
 Under side of "A" leaves the impression of a less than robust structure upholding the roadway. Given the current use of road salt and Ohio weather, I think this structure would be a maintenance nightmare. just as the one it replaced is.
 1 (0%)  
 Cleveland has history of grand architecture to its bridges. Bridge A with the uplighting effect gives a nice night time visual, but lacks any vertical line. Bridge B is very plain, almost as if the bridge is trying to not be there, even though it breaks the line of sight of the city. Bridge C actually get's it right with a vertical gateway at the entrance to the city. A larger cable stay bridge would have been ideal though.
 1 (0%)  
 If the arches in Bridge C could be incoprorated with the designs in Bridge A it would Exeeed Criteria.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges B and A are not bridges that stand out as an attraction point; Bridge C is just that.
 1 (0%)  
 Uninspiring
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has the Cleveland style night light on the frame of the bridge, however, Bridge C has a unique arch that shows Cleveland's history and that it is taking a step towards the future.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C looks so futuristic! It could bring Cleveland into a whole new light!
 1 (0%)  
 I love the look, style, and think it does a good job of complementing the Cleveland skyline. I think the design also reflects the growing art community and Cleveland. It's a great first impression of our city!!
 1 (0%)  
 I like Bridge C but it's not a Cleveland bridge? It almost reminds me of the new one in Boston. It's not unique enough nor does the design express much. The other two bridges more or less, mirror the current bridges in the Cleveland are. I don't feel that they are unique or great stand outs but they will fit into the Cleveland view quite well.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is almost like the one that is there. It needs to be updated into modern times with the newest materials and methods. The bridge in Toledo almost looks like Bridge C but with a different twist.
 1 (0%)  
 I think Bridget C stands out from the other two and can best reflect the image and history of Cleveland, an industrial city.
 1 (0%)  
 I believe that bridge C embodies the city's history while at the same time demonstrating a willingness to move towards the future.
 1 (0%)  
 All 3 are vanilla and plain. There is no connection to any of the existing bridges of distinction such as the Lorain Ave bridge and the Detroit-Superior bridge. Both have flavor on top to provide some distinction and connection to the city. None of the 3 choices does this. These 3 choices are very dissapointing.
 1 (0%)  
 A is chic but also reminds me of area
 1 (0%)  
 A and B are generic bridge designs and are unsightly like any common bridge. C is elegant and unique.
 1 (0%)  
 A most closely connects with existing structures by incorperating the curved arches
 1 (0%)  
 - none of the 3 bridge designs fit into cleveland's rich history. much of cleveland was put together in art deco of the 1920's but this doesnt seem to be expressed sufficiently in the bridge candidates. - bridge A the y-bridge is a good start below deck but it needs more character above the deck to anchor it into the city. the y-bridge has balance and openness but just uncerimoniously ends above the platform so it doesnt mesh with vertical components of the terminal tower stonework or hope memorial stonwork and statuary or airplane wing federal court building or blue veterans memorial tall iron and sandstone. add art deco stonework complimenting the art deco of the Hope Memorial Bridge and terminal tower. this stonework above the deck could help the y-bridge reach up and mesh with the cityscape. - since we have to look at this for the next century we really need to involve the CLEVELAND ART COMMUNITY in this much much more. (if we dont have a good design then close the current and use 480 and surface roads until we can do it right. If we are short of cash we should get wider support from suburbs [as so goes cleveland so goes the sururbs] or at least make the bridge modular in some way so that its asthetics could be easily adapted later). any of the 3 bridges ideas would make nondescript utilitarian overpasses for the surrounding area but since this is for the city center we need to do better if we are to attract travelers and business. cleveland has had too many knocks and deserves better. we have to take hold of this and do a better job for our children.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is radical. I like the design for the bows, but the rest of the bride is too plain.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A looks fragile and does not reflect any other design elements in Cleveland. Design B is just boring. Design C speaks to the future of Cleveland and creates a new gateway to the City.
 1 (0%)  
 best of the 3 ~ wish it were more dramatic like the new bridge in toledo
 1 (0%)  
 A: Similar to existing bridges B: Unique design, but would still fit in with existing bridges C: Ugly and Distracting from existing bridges and architecture
 1 (0%)  
 You are about to spend an incredible sum of money on something that is, at most, mediocre. Furthermore, you have had ample time and spent a large sum of money to plan this project. Cleveland deserves better, and you have not accomplished what you set out to do.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is very basic and industrial looking but doesn't reflect any "rich architectural history", it's just a bridge. Bridge C is the same for the most part, except the arches which seem to be only present on a small part of the bridge, the rest is again, just a plain industrial looking bridge. Bridge A is by far the most appealing, appears to have arches with the open design, which at least reflects the older bridges and has some aesthetic quality to it.
 1 (0%)  
 I like the lines of A and the arches on C
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is similar to the current bridge design and appears and would complement the current setting. Bridge B is okay as well but lacks character and appears more utilitarian. Bridge C is okay as well but the suspension arches seem to be a bit out of place and probably would be eliminated once someone figures there would be a maintenance cost factored in.
 1 (0%)  
 I like the suspension portion of the Bridge C design. However, the rest of the bridge is as boring as can be. It's too bad the design aesthetic of the suspension portion can't be continued across to make a dramatic statement to the Cleveland skyline. Design A is nice, but it looks so much like the current bridge. Why keep the same. And Design B is a yawn.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A and B are close in design to all the other highway bridges around Cleveland but don't highlight anything, are just bland. Bridge C is unusual but not overly so and would be a nice change from the common highway bridge to show off our other bridges like the swing bridge or some of the railroad ones.
 1 (0%)  
 The trusses of design A inspire me. The support arches of the bridge of design C intrigue me. Please combine these elements.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A and C look cool, bridge B sucks ass.
 1 (0%)  
 It needs to be modern for today 's environment. The city needs to be attractive.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B looks like any freeway bridge out in rural Ohio or anywhere USA Bridge C looks artsy fartsy cutesy, the arches seem strictly for visual effect with absolutely no regard for architectural history or the aesthetic history of the place.
 1 (0%)  
 It has a nice graceful look to it. Sort of like the waves on the lake. Not too modern, but not Victorian-ornate either. I like the lighting underneath as well.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is simply too plain and looks like all other previous bridges here in Northeast Ohio. Bridge C, has a nice effect to it that may look nice for Cleveland's skyline, however, the rest of the bridge looks bland. I think that If Bridge A was combined with Bridge C, than this would EXCEED criteria. If this can not be done, I think that Bridge A is the best out of the 3 choices.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge A reflects a simple elegant design while bridge B looks more utilitarian and bridge C reminds me of all the salt eaten mundane structures that it will become-ugly.
 1 (0%)  
 at first I like c, but after looking at them closely I really like A, the lines are great and such a modern look
 1 (0%)  
 I looked at all 3 artist renderings and I think Bridge A looks best. Bridge 2 is my second pick.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is beautiful, dynamic, and will add to the city skyline. Bridge B is boring
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is elegant, but not overstated. It's gorgeous at night and will be the perfect symbol for our city.
 1 (0%)  
 a is plane ,b is nice but c is great
 1 (0%)  
 Unfortunately, if you mean "looks the same as everything we have" then all these bridges meet the criteria. None are really inspiring or architecturally interesting or add any good element of design to the city.
 1 (0%)  
 C looks awesome, and A looks pretty cool. B is boring.
 1 (0%)  
 I would like to see a new bridge that truly welcomes people to the city, and presents the city in the most positive light. I also know that many people have a fear of any bridge, but large ones more so. Bridges A and C seem to simply replace the current bridge, with minimal changes. Both show a single bridge with a divider. However, the arches on Bridge C make more of a statement, much like a pair of hands holding the cars that pass. Bridge B is very similar to the I480 bridge, just east of the I77 interchange, with what looks like 2 separate bridges, and adds no real feeling of warmth or comfort or aesthetics. (More drawings would be helpful for all of the choices.)
 1 (0%)  
 I would have liked the steel to extend lower to shorter concrete piles. Bridge C is status quo..seen it in Toledo, Boston, we need to be different. Bridge B...looks boring except for underneath which will inspire the ore ships if thats what you crave.
 1 (0%)  
 Zzzzzz...
 1 (0%)  
 A and B are too traditional, they do not add to the history, they simply repeat it.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is rather boring. Just another every day bridge. I believe Bridge C has a unique architecture that could be a new landmark for Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 I feel bridge A blends in with the Cleveland architecture the best of the 3 options.
 1 (0%)  
 A decent chunk of Cleveland's industrial history is known for steel fabrication. A design that incorporates the rare abilities and characteristics of steel such as Bridge C would show that Cleveland is a city that is up-to-date with the current advances in steel fabrication and construction.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A&B match the other bridges, but don't make the city have much creativity or imagination. Bridge C makes the city look like it is going green, and a city that will do anything to help everything that needs it, with bridge C, it is the Earth.
 1 (0%)  
 In the sense that Cleveland has a rich bridge design history, I don't think that the new bridge should be limited by previous designs. To add to the rich history, bring in a new design. This means only design C. Designs A and B are tired and old for Cleveland. Also, they are not unique or rare in any way. Designs A and B are very typical of bridge construction design used in the Southern United States.
 1 (0%)  
 B- Looks like a plain bridge. It doesn't stand out in recgonition to Cleveland's style. A- Good senetic view. C- Great senetic view and easily recgonizable.
 1 (0%)  
 All designs are very plain & have very little character that would represent the history of our area.
 1 (0%)  
 Both A and C give the industrial feel of Cleveland, but also moves into the future of Cleveland. B looks as is not much has changed at all.
 1 (0%)  
 I think that bridges A & C are both aesthetically pleasing, but it would be interesting to see the elegant lace-work design of Bridge A merged with the arches in Bridge C. Of the two, Bridge C provides the most unique look for downtown Cleveland. It would be nice to see something that was uniquely ours in the bridge design and Bridge C comes closest to that.
 1 (0%)  
 Has most fluid design with out obstructing view of city.
 1 (0%)  
 B IS BORING, A IS REMANISCENT OF OLD CLEVELAND LOOK, I WANT A DYNAMIC CHANGE, ADD LIFE!
 1 (0%)  
 Why does the design have to be inspired by Cleveland's previous historical accomplishments? The design should be inspired by the architects and the people of Cleveland to be the best (as in the latest, greatest technology) bridge ever built to date; structurally and aesthetically.
 1 (0%)  
 All of the designs are mundane and uninspired. Bridge C at least tries to introduce an element of design to the process but shows little sensitivity to the context or location. A cable-stayed arch next to Progressive Field? More for show than function - a joke. One would think, for a million dollars, a designer could come up with something a little more imaginative. It is obvious that none of the competitors give a tinkers damn about Cleveland or about signature design.
 1 (0%)  
 All three bridges cmpliment the city of cleveland well. Like the revitelized flats,and our sports teams this is a great city.Lets build this bridge with clevelanders,and show some pride.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A mostly resembles the Superior rd bridge when lit at night which fits with the existing infrastructure. Although bridge B also resembles existing bridges, it is somewhat boring and not very interesting. I like bridge C best, because it supplements the existing bridges, adds a little excitement to the skyline, without being too extreme.
 1 (0%)  
 I am not sure there is any real aesthetic history with regards to bridge architecture in the downtown history. Bridge B is just plain boring and more of an eye sore than anything else. Bridge A is nice, but too much like the current bridge. The skyline needs something which grabs your attention versus just being background.
 1 (0%)  
 $15M and this is the best you can come up with? See the I280 bridge in Toledo - the bridge in Michigan going to Canada - the Golden Gate - the bridges over the rivers in Pittsburgh - the Skyway in Tampa. The list goes on and on and on. I'm a professional engineer and these designs are HORRIBLE. I could have drawn up a better design on a bar napkin. Bridge B is the bridge over I480 revisited. I would prefer the existing bridge be replicated. It's design is visually more appealing than the other 3 added together and multiplied by 1000.
 1 (0%)  
 our bridges, while innovative and unique, are not especially cool looking. a & b fit our current bridges exactly - boring. c is different than all our other bridges - different is good.
 1 (0%)  
 What rich desigin history?? Every bridge in this city is unaspiring. So if they are looking to maintaing the unaspiring history of bridges in the vallely. They got it right.
 1 (0%)  
 Well you folks have no clue. The whole question is what is best for Ohio. That is the lowest cost easyest to maintain bridge. B does not work cement strucutures and salt don't work long term in Ohio, nor does plan C cables and the weather lots of rain will make the cables to bridge connections corrode and fail. A is the only answer we can sand blast and paint that structure, wake up. Pretty does not get it for the tax payers, or for Ohio to return to a state not in the red for our state budget, and for ther mfg. factories high tailing it out of here with our high taxes wake up folks. We are second or third to California or New yYork for our anti busness state agenda of taxes and rules. Vote you wallet and save Ohio from the big spenders now in office. We need jobs not more taxes.
 1 (0%)  
 Cleveland is the greatest city in the world. Bridge A captures this because it is 'thick' and 'full' throughout.
 1 (0%)  
 I love the triangular design that is highlighted in the night with the blue lights in Bridge A. It gives a great and positive effect on Cleveland's downtown night life which hopefully is making a come back. Bridge C reflects on Cleveland's Steel Industry and is a elegant highlight.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C offers the most Original look one that scream WOW!, but is not a 5/5 because according to the designs the suspension does not span the entire bridge i think were it to be the entire span to at least have the suspension design it would definitely take the win on aesthetics.
 1 (0%)  
 I feel that Bridge C is the most eye catching.
 1 (0%)  
 I think bridge c will bring an entire new view to cleveland's skyline.
 1 (0%)  
 A and B are much more traditional looking. C is a bit modernized, but I feel that Cleveland should add some modernized structures to its city. Being able to show a transition into the future and not relying on tradition could attract businesses to the area. It says Cleveland is looking forward.
 1 (0%)  
 None of the three designs gives Cleveland a visual identification like the arch in St. Louis, the Golden Gate bridge in SF, the Brooklyn Bridge in New York. The designs are boring. Again make Cleveland a boring place to be pitied rather than a leader. Oh how sad!
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge a brings a nice clean, sleak look to bring cleveland into the future of the city
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A at least has some style, but it's hardly rich bridge architecture. B and C are your basic boring, generic ODOT bridges. C does have a couple McDonald signs bolted onto one end for some reason. Wow!
 1 (0%)  
 I think Bridge C has a great look to it and would be a wonderful contribution to the city to show Cleveland is updated and not stuck in the past. Bridge A is boring, simple, a safe way to go - it doesn't show that while the world changes, the minds of the city changes. Bridge B is also a safe bet but has a certain updated look to it.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A clearly is the most consistent of the choices with regards to aesthetic history of the city. It is consistent with the city's other bridges and is the most classic with regard to its architecture. The other designs look very modern. I would stick with a classic style, not only because it visually conforms with the rest of the city (as opposed to sticking out), but also because I believe that a traditional city look is more visually appealing (for what it's worth, I am 28). Additionally, Bridge A appears to have the least amount of waste or unnecessary elements. Environmentally friendly LED lighting will give this classic bridge a beautiful and elegant look after dark.
 1 (0%)  
 I like the arches on bridge A. I wish there was something above the roadway.
 1 (0%)  
 None of the pictures on the PDF files give an overall view of the bridges
 1 (0%)  
 I love the seperation of the two directions in Bridge B. I think this may help with the slow downs from onlookers when something happens in the other direction. Bridge C has the better desgin with the arches that will add to the cities skyline.. However there drawings does nothing to show how the bridge will fit.. I see and under pass and what looks like the street level for the bridge itself. It basically just looks like an improvement on the extisting bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Proposal B lacks dimension, it appears a a flat plate on pillars.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A and C add a modern appearance to the city. Bridge B appears to meet the criteria, but does not move the city into the 21st century.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has a very graceful design and complements Cleveland's skylilne.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is just too plain and Bridge C seems too over the top.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is to plain and simple and Bridge C looks much more expensive. I believe Bridge A shows a good balance that the city and country will repsect in tough economic times.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is too modern and does not fit in well with Cleveland's civic bridge history. Bridge B is too plain. Bridge A is the best choice!
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is most aesthetically pleasing and in line with our architectural history.
 1 (0%)  
 A and B are boring. At least C has character
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A somewhat reflects the steel arches of the bridges around it, Bridge C is at least interesting and displays one more type of bridge to add to the collection, Bridge B is an insult and ODOT should be ashamed of displaying it as an option.
 1 (0%)  
 A is an attractive, clean look. B is too basic, lacks personality C intrudes on the skyline, too loud
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is a classic design and respects the aesthetic history of Cleveland
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A looks inovative. Bridge B is sort of common and does not stand out. Bridge c might go a little too far with the design.
 1 (0%)  
  os·ten·ta·tious. Only Bridge C accomplishes this moniker.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A captures the industrial tradition of our area with an eye on contemporary. I like the forward thinking with consideration of the past. Bridge B feels stagnant and Bridge C is too progressive with no reference to architectural history.
 1 (0%)  
 I don't care for any of the renderings or pdf's presented. They present an unrealistic view of any of the designs. No streetlighting is present or illuminated. No lane dividers or traffic barriers are presented. No railings / fences preventing jumpers are present. No controls for nesting birds are present. No highway signs are present. There is so, so, so much missing in these unreal renderings it is hard to make a fair or logical judgement.
 2 (0%)  
 I like Bridge A because it keeps the feel of the original design and does not take away from the views of Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Cleveland and lighted bridges are a huge part of what makes night in Cleveland so nice. I like the interlace bridge for the way it looks from underneath and then how dramatic it will look at night in lights!
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C best displays the rich bridge arcitectural history of the vallley.
 1 (0%)  
 All designs seem to conform to either existing bridged or the design caractatistics necessary. Bridge B proposes an intersted concept with two seperate bridges, my only concern would be that before or after the seperation would that lead to similar delays when the lanes combine to the delays we have now? Bridge C offers by far the most eye pleasing design.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A provides a clean, modern look to a dull, industrial valley area.
 1 (0%)  
 I love the aesthetic of Bridge C.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C does not reflect the history of this place.
 1 (0%)  
 The arched design of bridge C is more pleasing to the eye, it seems to elevate the architeture of Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A appears to combine the functionality of a concrete pier and steel beam bridge while still showing aspects of an all steel bridge structure in the graceful arches with accent lighting that would fit in perfectly with the area's similar look. Bridge B appears functional only (similar to the majority of standard bridges in the state), with the only impressive aesthetic aspect being its sheer size (which all 3 designs have). Bridge C appears to be a near duplicate of Bridge B with the addition of the smaller cable span at the end. While slightly more aesthetically pleasing than Bridge B, it does not have the continuity and overall impressive impact of the Bridge A design.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is also the most attractive, the night few is fabulous
 1 (0%)  
 B is too plain, 2 would a maintenance issue.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is too flashy. Bridge B has too much steel to maintain. Bridge A looks good and looks like it will require the least maintenance over it's life.
 1 (0%)  
 B is boring
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is just a road, it looks like there was no creativity put into this design. Combining the designs of bridge A and C would be the best option.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge design A is aesthetically pleasing and a very appropriate design for the Innerbelt. The underlighting is a simple yet crucial feature that is displayed on several other Cleveland Bridges. Bridge design A is hands-down my favorite option. Bridge design B is way to simple and provides no "wow factor". Bridge design C is almost the exact same as B except it implementes a cable span design. Although this is aesthetically pleasing it is inconsistent with other bridges in Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C!!! I agree with the part of the question that refers to the bridge being the next contribution to the rich bridge history of the valley. Cleveland has a diverse and rich history in bridges. Bridge A attempts to mimic and imitate other bridges in the area. Bridge B is bland and seemingly did nothing to address aesthetics. Bridge C is the clear winner to me, it brings a unique and innovative design to Cleveland. With its impressive arches, Bridge C is the only option that attempts to create history for the city and region.
 1 (0%)  
 I like the new clean, fresh look with the structure of Bridge A. I would also love to see the lake, and area underneath cleaned up like they show in the picture. I choose A, others are more modern but Bridge A, I believe fits the classic, look of most of our buildings in cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 The bridge A design, landscaping, lighting and bike path seem to be a better fit for the city that is trying to remodel itself.
 1 (0%)  
 The bridge design is beautiful. It would standout across the state.
 1 (0%)  
 A fits the city and it is pleasing to the eye. B is boring and C is not for our city. I don't care for the curved beams being in our skyline. A is modern yet it still fits.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A looks very innovative and cutting edge, which is a direction Cleveland should be heading in.
 1 (0%)  
 Looks like a revolutionary City of Cleveland Bridge. Cleveland used to be known as the "Bridge City" until they all became old and dilapidated. This design could put us back on the "bridge map". Bridge B looks like the old 480 Bridge, please do not do that one! Bridge C is neat, but that's only a small portion (less than 10%) of the future bridge. The rest of is is similiar to B. Don't like it.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is offering the city a consistent look that compliments our other historical bridges. It fully supports the feel of downtown Cleveland, architecturally, while still providing an updated look.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is too plain and boring. Bridge C has an interesting top design but it is boring to look at on the sides and underneath...and it's very dark at night. I like Bridge A but I wish we could mix A with C's top arches or somehing similar. A needs a WOW factor.
 1 (0%)  
 I like the way it is. The others appear to go up hill and down. A is flat. It looks streamlined.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A will be a great addition to Cleveland's historic bridges. Bridge B - are you serious? Bridge C one cool small span - what about the rest of the bridge?
 1 (0%)  
 Not sure how B or C meet this criteria...Bridge A - Spot On
 1 (0%)  
 All three designs are very boring, uninspired and definitely do not represent any aspect of Cleveland. The Arches in Bridge C are interesting, but the rest of the bridge is boring and has no architectural relevance. The trusses in Bridge A are interesting, when you see the bridge from below, but there is nothing at street level that make it aesthetically pleasing. Bridge B is the worst of all, boring and uninspired, just like every other ODOT bridge! Combining the Trusses from Bridge A with the Arch from Bridge C would be an OK compromise (best of the worst) but far from aesthetically pleasing or significant to the City of Cleveland. The Veteran's Memorial Bridge is a great symbol for Cleveland, take a second look at that for some inspiration.
 1 (0%)  
 Both A& C have good photographic possiblities. None of the designs interfer with the skyline. Design C may not blend well with the ball field
 1 (0%)  
 The arches recall the classic bridges over the Cuyahoga River in the Flats.
 1 (0%)  
 I feel that Bridge C most reflects the look of the current bridge, while adding a modern flair!
 1 (0%)  
 I really like the Arch on Bridge C as I feel it reaches from the past to the future. It is a very strong design.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A looks very modern and appears to have a good structural foundation. I love the accent lights! I recently moved to Milwaukee, WI from NE Ohio, and the new interchange here has the lights and night, and its very cool! It just gives the city a great ambiance! Hope Cleveland can experience the same beauty!
 1 (0%)  
 Like this design the best.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A's design spans the entire length and is very artistic and pleasing that way. Bridge B looks like it was built in 1940 and doesnt look good at all. And bridge C's wire arch looks good but that is only one little section, the rest is boring.
 1 (0%)  
 like A
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has the most character
 1 (0%)  
 BRIDGE "A" IS AN INSPIRING VISION OF THE FUTURE OF CLEVELAND WHILE IT FITS IN VERY NICELY WITH THE RICH ARCHITECTURAL HISTORY OF THE BRIDGES IN THE VALLEY.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is beautiful and detailed with charm yet strength! Just like Cleveland!
 1 (0%)  
 the look of bridge C is very appealing. I feel it is contemporary and will be well received.
 1 (0%)  
 I really like the way proposed bridge a is lighted at night, bridge c I like the sides, but it feels a little flat at the beginning of the bridge, but it also appears safer while seeming artistic. I think Bridge b is simply blah.
 1 (0%)  
 I like the design of A best
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C does not fit in Cleveland,it looks like a bridge that should be in Florida. Bridge B looks like the I-480 bridge very plain. i like BRIDGE A it has strength and power it fits in with a steel town.
 1 (0%)  
 I think it looks great, very Cleveland if you know what I mean, sharp. Lit up at night, that's the look I'd like to see makes me want to take a drive over it, very cool
 1 (0%)  
 I think that bridge A blends nicely with the history of cleveland its nice without being showly and without taking away for Clevelands beautiful skyline- Bridge B is too plain and C is to gaudy and takes way for the skyline
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is astetically pleasing at both day and night.
 1 (0%)  
 The Steel Structures for "B" & "C" are very vanilla, & not very aesthetic, as compared to "A" with its lacy open design, which more represents Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is strong and solid looking. Bridge B is took skinny looking Bridge C looks like it should be in St. Louis
 1 (0%)  
 The artistic rendering of Bridge A was done excellently. In my opinion, Bridge A scores a little higher than Bridge B.
 1 (0%)  
 This bridge is best for Cleveland
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is too futuristic looking
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C offers itself to an aesthetic presence which is more visible day or night from a distance and up close. It's Structural/Architectural presence will most likely be better seen by illumination incorporated into design then would either A or B.
 1 (0%)  
 Both b and c look like what we already have. The arches only impact right at downtown and would only mess the view of our city.
 1 (0%)  
 Something new and it stands out like the new bridge in Columbus, OH
 1 (0%)  
 i think the bridge (A) would be a definate asset to Cleveland
 1 (0%)  
 I like both A & C, but prefer A as the abutment design is similar to the Lorain/Carnegie bridge art deco look. Bridge C's above grade struts will probably conflict with Progressive field's architecture. B's design seemed too minimalistic. Design A's night lighting will look fantastic in conjunction with the Jackknife bridge lighting.
 1 (0%)  
 I think this design is well suited for the area .I love the arch of the design.
 1 (0%)  
 It is uniquely designed to enhance the beautiful city of Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 I really like Bridge A it is eye appealing and the design looks awesome unique
 1 (0%)  
 B and C look like just regular bridges, I love driving through OH and enjoying the diversity of the bridges and B and C just don't make the statement...Bridge A shows a great design allowing the view of the buildings to come through underneath with the open feel.
 1 (0%)  
 I feel bridge A would meet the design history and history of the valley.
 1 (0%)  
 I like the look.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A seemed more unique and modern that the other two and almost frames Cleveland in the background. Bridge C draws too much attention to the arches on the bridge instead of the cityscape.
 1 (0%)  
 BRIDGE A IS VERY PEASING TO THE EYE AND ATTRACTIVE BRIDGE B DOES NOTHING FOR DESIGN AND DOES NOT CPOMPLIMENT THE CITY BRIDGE C IS ONLY A COUPLE HUNDRED FEET WITH THE ARCH AND NOTHING AFTER THAT BRIDGE A IS THE MOST COMPLETE DESIGN.
 1 (0%)  
 Provides an aesthetic look.
 1 (0%)  
 graceful symmetry, yet conveys strength
 1 (0%)  
 All three are boring and uninspiring and ODOT should add a sidewalk to connect neighborhoods and regions and make it more functional for city residents who don't drive or even own a car.
 1 (0%)  
 A is nice with good asthetics, however unrealistic as to the impact on the surrounding areas. B is bland and displays no impact on the surounding area. C is a good solid bridge with good asthetics. The arches (gateway) at the Gateway area near Progressive Field adds to the attraction of the area.
 1 (0%)  
 I think this design is the most unique, not imposing, but still stands out.
 1 (0%)  
 Too utilitarian, uninspired and boring.
 1 (0%)  
 All of these design appear under-thought. They are quite boring, and do not appear to be as well-designed as many of the new bridges going up in the state (see Toledo/Maumee River...) and around the country. They CERTAINLY do not live up to the qualities of the bridges already there.
 1 (0%)  
 Unfortunately cost may rule out the only aesthetic choice of bridge A and will be yet again a painful could of had, just like sports championships in Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Frankly, I do not think any of the designs do justice to the city of Cleveland. They are ordinary interstate bridges -- nothing memorable. How about an iconic bridge like the the recently built Zakim bridge in Boston? Bridge A is passable but certainly not worthy of a city trying to rebuild its image as a forward-thinking city.
 1 (0%)  
 I see scant, if any, references to the Lorain-Carnegie or any of the lift bridges in the flats -- nothing I recognize, at least.
 1 (0%)  
 Each bridge in Cleveland seems unique. This is unique cable arch.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A provides a balance of historical similarity and modern aesthetics Bridge B is too industrial-looking while Bridge C is so dramatic as not to blend with the existing infrastructure
 1 (0%)  
 Although Bridges A & B look nice, Bridge C has a nice style with the cables. It looks like it "fits" with the surrounding bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 I hope whoever is in charge of this bridge design at ODOT gets stranded on a deserted island and contracts genital lice. Way to lead the way Cleveland!
 1 (0%)  
 Could you have found less architecturally interesting designs? B, especially, is ridiculously boring. The designs do not come close to meeting the above criteria. They look like they belong in Tampa, not Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 I think that bridge C does more than move traffic, the arches are welcoming in either direction. I like that. Bridge A is beautiful, I would like it better with the arches added to it. When you think of all the new stuff happening here, I think bridge C fits better.
 1 (0%)  
 A looks clean and efficient. Design is sleek and classy and the lights remind me of the bridges down town, good connection. B looks like a normal bridge. Doesn't look like it will add to the city. C, I don't like at all. The cable design is over the top and does not complement the rest of the city.
 1 (0%)  
 B looks like any bridge in say Texas or Florida or any place USA. C looks like it should be in California or Europe like Sweden.
 1 (0%)  
 I see little more than stock highway bridges without any reference to the culture, background or aesthetics of Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has a more elegant design. It is still quite simple and appears affordable. The supporting beam style breaks up the monotony of the current bridge, but I think something at the street level is still needed. Bridge B is what we already have and Bridge C looks plain boring.
 1 (0%)  
 I like the simplicity and gracefulness of the design of "Bridge B". These factors make it look stronger also.
 1 (0%)  
 The cable bridge would really brighten up the skyline. Bridge B is plain and does noting to enhance the city.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A incorporates the industrial past of Cleveland while providing a new feel. In addition, it flows well with the other bridges that remain lit as night falls.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B, is the same old boring design used everywhere. Bridge A is a step up, but provides no increased architectural value to the cityscape. Bridge C provides a unique new design and gateway into the downtown area.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C will add a bit of spark to the downtown landscape, while staying true to Cleveland's "steel town" roots.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is a great design
 1 (0%)  
 I think that the so called "lacy-top" bridge fits into not only our current city style but also our past with a modern touch. The lighted underside brings new life to the beautiful skylkine that we already have. It would be really cool to change the lights for special events such as Christmas(green and red), the Browns (orange), Indians(red and blue) and CAVS(maroon and gold?) Desing A is an awesome design and I look forward to seeing the real thing!
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A looks professional and matches the surrounding environment, Bridge B is nice, but the asthetical appealing, Bridge C, I have seen similar bridges in other cities (Toledo) - and they do not look that great after they are completed
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is exquisite and would be a great addition to the city. Bridge B is too plain and Bridge C is too loud with the arches and cables.
 1 (0%)  
 Cleveland desparately needs to continue moving forward from an infrastructure design perspective. The Federal Building was a step in the right direction. Bridge C continues with the more modern asthetics.
 1 (0%)  
 A comes closest to reflecting an existing structure, the Detroit-Superior bridge in some elements and the Lorain-Carnegie bridge in others. The arches on C appear to be an afterthought on an otherwise pedestrian design. B, though showing clean lines, is in no way inspiring.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C brings both (1) a architectural flare with the cable stay at the entrance to the heart of the downtown area; and (2) Bridge C also brings a sleak modern day economical and functional design meeting the requirements without a heavy taxpayer burden.
 1 (0%)  
 The scenary for Bridge A is NOT realistic and is apparently attempting to make the bridge more asthetic than it actually is.
 1 (0%)  
 The arching cable bridge would compliment the architetural features of Progressive Field and the Q nicely.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A reflects the architectural history of the valley while adding a classic modern feel
 1 (0%)  
 My choice is bridge C. It offers some historical appeal, and a modern twist, connecting new and old construction.
 1 (0%)  
 like to design as it's different than the rest
 1 (0%)  
 The Bridge C design is a great design that adds character to the City of Cleveland as we have no other bridges like that.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B should be excluded simply for a complete lack of creativity. Bridge A didn't stretch too far beyond that. Bridge C is the only unique sumission that could actually contribute to the "rich bridge architectural history of the valley"
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A: Steel Structure, OK Bridge B: Looks like any other bridge Bridge C: Interesting, will add to the skyline
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C architecturally captures the eye and highlights the evolution of bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 I have always like the suppension look for bridges. Old school but new look for Cleveland
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C provides aesthetic appeal to both travellers view and view from below, while A&B from below only.
 1 (0%)  
 I could not say it any better than Steven Litt did in his 8/7/10 Plain Dealer article. All three designs are mediocre, conventional designs, none of which pay justice to the prominent visual presence that a bridge at this location has. At least Bridge A has underdeck lighting, which is in keeping with the dramatic lighting trends needed for this dark city, such as has been done with the terminal tower and Superior Viaduct.
 1 (0%)  
 A and B look tto much like an exact copy of the old, C has some character
 1 (0%)  
 This design matches Cleveland's cityscape perfectly.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is the best looking design and allows for a clear view of the skyline with not obstructions (suspension beams, rods, etc.) Bridge B - simply don't like it at all. Bridge C - has a cool cotemporary look but offers an obstructed view of the skyline.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C appears to reflect the areas initiative to be a leading edge city with consistency to related roots yet a new and exhilerating attitude! Bridges A&B I feel are to related to the existing bridge with not much new life to offer.
 1 (0%)  
 This design brings a freshness to the city in contract to the historical Lorain Carnegie bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Design C provides an arch to enhance the skyline as you approach downtown traveling accross the interbelt. No one will see what is under the bridge while crossing it.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C reflects and coincides with current designs in the area but the supports give more viewing area and space for further development
 1 (0%)  
 I felt Bridge A enhances the beauty of the area
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is the only bridge that will be appreciated from the vehicles driving on it, the others can only be appreciated from below.
 1 (0%)  
 we need a bridge that will be another focal point to our city. I dont see either bridge 1 or 2 as doing that. They both appear to simply be a bridge, not an historic landmark as bridge 3 could be.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A looks the best, brings a new fresh look to the city that is wonderful.
 1 (0%)  
 Believe it showcases the structure while doesnt go too far and takes away from the skyline like Bridge C while is much more unique and exciting than Bridge B.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is a plain Jane Bridge A is nice. It has the best rendering Bridge C is fresh and the future.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A shows unrealistic situation--grass under the bridge?
 1 (0%)  
 Why the emphasis on "inspired"? A bridge is a bridge is a bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 the suspension bridges are like landmarks. they stand out and everyone will think of this bridge when they think of cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 I feel that bridge C best reflects the existing bridge architecture so prevelant to the valley. It will do nothing but become synonomous with downtown Cleveland. I believe it will only add more beauty to the Cleveland Skyline.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C with its suspension cables gives the image of coming into something special and big. Gives nice image while driving on that type of bridge. Bridge B was too typical looking. Bridge A gave nice appearance from side or below bridge but not much aesthetic appeal from while driving on bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 I think about watching sports and when they show overhead shots of the city. Think about the amount of money which will be invested into this project, regardless of which design is chosen. For the investment the State of Ohio is making, it needs to become a centerpiece of Cleveland. The arch design in option C will become just that, a focal point to add architectural value to the great history of Cleveland. Option A has a great substructure design element, but nothing too great which will add to the overall skyline. Option B is too plain. We have hundreds of structures just like this across the state and country. Nothing special at all in option B.
 1 (0%)  
 I think it looks modern, but stays within the criteria.
 1 (0%)  
 Great design
 1 (0%)  
  I prefer the modern look including the arch.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has captured history of the city in a contempory way. The architectural history is reflected and blends well with the surrounding structures.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C gives Cleveland the "modern edge" it needs
 1 (0%)  
 The way Design C brings the surroundings into its design. everything flows together showing off Cleveland. Design A is good, but it is just has features under neath. Desing B is very boring
 1 (0%)  
 A & B are bridges but have little to no styling. Bridge C at least gives you something to look at.
 1 (0%)  
 I think that the arches on Bridge C are very majestic and really are an appropriate architectural contribution to the area.
 1 (0%)  
 How does any one of these contribute to the design vernacular of this region? How serious were you when you wrote this question? It doesn't contribute. It's banal. It's boring. It's forgettable.
 1 (0%)  
 All should have bike lanes. Shame on ODOT for not requiring it. Bridges B and C are simply ugly. Bridge A has an aesthetic line which draws the eye along its curves and provides form without being overbearing. The others lack any character whatsoever.
 1 (0%)  
 I think suspension bridge C explemplifies the midwest's manufacturing innovation by using an innovative bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 I don't think flat steel is much of a reflection. Look to Progressive field and it needs to reflect more of that type of interest, Bridge C comes close , but not far enough
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is a bridge that provides an architectural appeal. The other bridges are typical/standard bridge sections that are not unique.
 1 (0%)  
 None of the desigs really reflect any advancement in design. The appearances of the bridges will be looked past because there are truly no architectural elements. Bridge A is the most appealing bridge over the entire span, but has no special features as Bridge C does near Progressive Field. Bridge B is not even worth commenting on. If you combined the overall appearance of Bridge A with the architecural feature of Bridge C, then it would be acceptable, but not revolutionary. It appears Cleveland will let another opportunity of improving the appearacne of the city pass them by.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C brings to City of Cleveland's the spirit of innovation and a desire continue to make steady progress into an ever evolving future!
 1 (0%)  
 Both A and B provide some level of respect to Cleveland's bridge design history, but B is way too lacking in architectural elements that would tie it to the history of the valley. It is very modern and architecturally uninteresting in design. Design A more accurately captures the essence of the architecture of the bridges in the valley without being identical to the old bridge or existing bridges. It has some modern architectural details, but not so many as to be out of place. It is sleek, and elegant, much like the Hope Memorial bridge is elegant. Bridge C is not in keeping with the style of the other bridges in the community. It is a typical copy of so many others around the country. Not as nice as the Chesapeake Bay area bridges, but a weak copy of them. No real architectural detail or interest. It is too overly stylized and looks more like a cursive letter "M" from a well-known cosmetic brand than a good bridge of Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is interesting but bridge C brings on a flare that Cleveland needs C=Cleveland. I think bring B is boring.
 1 (0%)  
 The arched bridge (Bridge C) adds a bit of flair to the city while the other 2 bridges (A & B) look like what we already have.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A creates a symmetry for the bridge itself and the surrounding area.
 1 (0%)  
 Cleveland is an innovative city. With it's cable lift bridges this bridge is a new twist on the historic architecture that already exists. It blends new with old. And gives an exciting look for the future.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is both asthetically pleasing, yet blends well with the citys current skyline, as well as bringing Clevelands image into the 21st century!
 1 (0%)  
 I especially like how the steel is highlighted in Bridge aA, reflecting a part of our city's history. I feel that bridge B has a very uninspired, boring design, and bridge c doesn't really show a lot of imagination. If Bridge C was modeled after a similar bridge in Boston, it falls short.
 1 (0%)  
 There's nothing inspired about any of them.
 1 (0%)  
 The uniqueness of the C bridge should give Cleveland an edge compared to other large cities. It is aesthetically pleasing as well.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is a simple bridge with essentially no architectural significance at all. Bridge A is a little better, but still is nothing very special (and appears to contain a large amount of expensive steel). Bridge C gives Cleveland and Ohioans something to be proud of - an architecturally interesting bridge that would help create a recognizable image of Cleveland much like the bridge in Boston. For bridge C, my comments only apply to the version of the design with the arches and suspension cables.
 1 (0%)  
 The cable stayed arches compliment the industrial look of the city behind, while the soft curves ecentuate the skyline.
 1 (0%)  
 The unique girder style of bridge A will greatly enhance the cities skyline
 1 (0%)  
 I think bridge C brings a new inspiring look for the city.
 1 (0%)  
 C and A bring strong aspects of Cleveland architecture while adding beauty to the skyline, and C also brings in a new style of architecture to the Cleveland skyline. allot B however seems rather lackluster for such an important icon.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A clearly integrates the civic, industrial, and design history of Cleveland, with a modern flow flow. Bridges B & C are very basic concrete and steel girders repecively. Bridge C tries to add some flare at the North (?) approach but seems out of place and does not fit the character of our city.
 1 (0%)  
 The designs are bland and are copies of DC's Wilson Bridge. They look like cookie cutter designs.
 1 (0%)  
 Old world design of which Cleveland shows daily with existing bridges. Arch design is astetic to Cleveland Architercture.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A, in the Y-shaped steelwork, most reflects the character of the city and Cuyahoga River valley, with its many other bridge designs in steel. Neither Bridge A nor Bridge B reflect the character of this. They appear generic highway bridge designs that might be anywhere in the US. Bridge C's arch above the bridge deck appears an add-on, and is out of scale and out of character with the remainder of the bridge design. Bridge A could have gone further. To get a #5, the pilasters would also have had to reflect Cleveland's industrial and bridge design history. But they are simply straight, vertical, poured concrete pilasters. Neither their form nor their material is in tune with the historic bridges in the valley.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge's A and B are to bland and do not show off the city's rich steel industrial past like Bridge C does.
 1 (0%)  
 I think choice C is a classic looking bridge, and the arches give it a distinctive look.
 1 (0%)  
 combines past with the future
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C shows no achitectural history
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is Super Awesome
 1 (0%)  
 All are very uninteresting design wise. I like the aesthetics of the cables in Bridge C but it appears to be only for a very small segment of the entire structure's length; the remaining length is just as uninspired as the other bridge proposals.
 1 (0%)  
 The open beams are the only bridge that incorporates anything of aesthetic significance in the designs
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C showacases Cleveland's industrial history while also showing the future of Cleveland's growth.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C adds the most to what the city already has to offer.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is excellent b and c are to plain and look like normal bridges you would see anywhere Bridge A has a unique design that stands out
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A appears to be somewhat more complex in design and this tells me that Cleveland, so much like Pittsburgh, is known for being an industrial giant, can also handle anything complex.
 1 (0%)  
 gorgeous, modern design. well suited for downtown cleveland
 1 (0%)  
 Not only does this design meet all of the functional goals, it has the capability of becoming a cultural landmark for the downtown area. In this more contemprary style it most certainly fits best with the new architecture of the stadium area.
 1 (0%)  
 It is a sharp, crisp clean look, representative of our citys past, present and future architecture.
 1 (0%)  
 This looks liked a bridge in Cleveland should.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C has very short bridge with a nice design. However, that so-called "artistic design" is nothing that a proud Cleveland citizen should be able to lean on as our emerging symbol(THE BRIDGE IS TOO SHORT!!!). Bridge A has the best design hands down.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has nice architectural detalis that are consistant and has a good look as opposed to the run of the mill bridge designs of B&C.
 1 (0%)  
 These are dull and unimaginative designs. Thes designs look like slightly modified highway overpass bridges found all across the USA. These 3 dull designs look like the thousands of other highway overpasses in the US - These designs look like they could come from an overpass in Montana or Nevada or Mississippis or Delaware or Arkansas or any other place since there is style to these designs. There is little that is unique about these unimaginative designs. There is "no design in these designs"; just elongated highway overpasses. NO DESIGN of these 3 will "contribute to the rich bridge architectural history of the valley". Depressingly dull designs which will haunt the entryway to downtown Cleveland for the next 50 years
 1 (0%)  
 While all of the bridges are lackluster, only A is somewhat pleasing to the eye. It should be, by far, the only choice.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A looks the nicest of all 3 bridges, I think it would be a great contribution to Cleaveland's history. Bridge A for sure!!!!
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is just plain boring!
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A & C in my mind have a richer view of city and its bridge history where Bridge B is somewhat plain.
 1 (0%)  
 We should be fostering an environment of technological growth and this is clearly the choice.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge c is really ugly! Absolutely no respect to the aesthetic history.
 1 (0%)  
 I believe Bridge C would be a wonderful addition to Clevelands skyline.
 1 (0%)  
 These designs are uninspired. The designs could have borrowed elements from the Lorain-Carnegie bridge, the Detriot-Superior bridge, the seel work in Jacob's Field, etc.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A looks as though it belongs in Cleveland, but with an updated, fresh appeal. Bridge B looks a little too much as though it belongs in a futuristic sci-fi movie. Without the overhead arches, Bridge C is completely non-descript. With the arches, Bridge C looks like it doesn't belong in Cleveland at all.
 1 (0%)  
 A provides a modern look B looks like what exists today C looks like what exists today with the exception of the suspension bridge section
 1 (0%)  
 None of these designs show the slightest amount of creativity nor any concern for the effect this bridge will have on the city over the next 50 years.
 1 (0%)  
 I believe Bridge C's construction is aesthetically most compatible with the image of Cleveland's history and our future. Bridge B, I think, is too conservative -- while it's certainly compatible with Cleveland's industrial history, it breaks no new ground. Bridge A is great, but falls slightly short of C.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C looks too modern, doesn't blend in with existing architectural elements of the older bridges. Bridge A blends best with elements of old and new design features.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has the best design, It would fit in well with other cleaveland area bridges, And would look good for years to come.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge c shows excellent structure and would be the most structurely safe bridge
 1 (0%)  
 I cannot imagine less inspiring designs that A and B. Bridge C at least provides some interest--though even then I do not think it truly contributes to our architecture.
 1 (0%)  
 the main structure portion of design c reflects efficient, modern steel bridge design while the arch span provides a new iconic structure visible from all vantage points brining Clevelands bridge architecture into the 21st century.
 1 (0%)  
 Honestly, I'm disappointed in all three options. Bridge B is merely utilitarian, while A and C seem to have architectural detail thrown in as an afterthought. This span is consistently representative of the city and the region, through city shots shown nationally. It would have been nice to have something that was a centerpiece, and a point of pride, rather than a cement solid beam construction which has no inspiration to it whatsoever.
 1 (0%)  
 I love Bridge A. In my opionion, it respects the aesthetic history.
 1 (0%)  
 I think that Bridge A shows the most immagination and with its strees on the steel holding the deck up provides a link to the historic steel industry in our area.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A Reflects Clevelands History with a mild futuristic appeal. C is way too space age looking and B looks like a generic "K-Mart design".
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A provides the best aesthetic appearance, while meeting the design critiera. Bridge B may meet criteria, but is unimpressive. Bridge C does not appear to meet Cleveland's aesthic history, and there appears to be missing details in the architects rendering that may lead to design / construction issues.
 1 (0%)  
 Cleveland's History was based on steel. While Bridge C makes reference to this, it is purely a cosmetic response. Bridge A is the only concept that uses Steel as the backbone of its design - much like Cleveland upon which bridge iconically represents.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is timeless in design AND it's beautiful. This design will show off Cleveland's love of bridge night lighting and will define our present and past through its pronounced use of STEEL with concrete.
 1 (0%)  
 I really like the flow of Bridge C. I think it looks classy and will go well with the Q and Progressive Field lines.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge c arches abstruct the view of the stadium while the more southern span is very plain
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A looks the best and coordinates nicely with Progressive Field.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has an aesthetically pleasing design that is consistent throughout the entire length of the bridge. Bridge B is too simple and ordinary. Bridge C has a nice design at the one location but the remainder of the bridge is too basic and commonplace.
 1 (0%)  
 I really like how bridge A looks during the night time. I feel it is important for that bridge to fit in with the other amazing Cleveland bridges. The lighting on the bridge really makes it stand out.
 1 (0%)  
 Great Lakes Construction has a great design and would be great for the city. Bridge C is the best!
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C adds to the beauty and rich history of Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A's use of articulated steel pays some homage to Cleveland's history as a steel manufacturing city. The other 2 pay homage to boring bridge design, like the I-480 span over the Cuyahoga.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C does not respect the history of the current architecture.
 1 (0%)  
 Design A fully blends with the City's already inspiring renovation and rejuvating sppirit without extreme futuristic charateristics.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge design C is outstanding
 1 (0%)  
 the suspension bridge make it look like a major city
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C stands out and is more aesthetically plaesing and is less average.
 1 (0%)  
 Of the three designs Bridge A is absolutely the most aesthetically pleasing. The other designs are very boring and generic.
 1 (0%)  
 90% of visitors to Cleveland will never see what is below the deck of these bridges. Bridge C offers a memorable Gateway welcoming visitors to the city. Few people spend time under the bridge. All city, stadium, Q visitors will see the the Arch.
 1 (0%)  
 I think Bridge A captures the essence of Cleveland's civic and historical architecture. The other two bridges left me cold and didn't give me any sense of a theme or feeling.
 1 (0%)  
 The check mark arches of bridge C would not blend with the city, just as the R&R Hall of Fame building.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A does not pay any respects to Cleveland's Bridge design history, and although the design is very futuristic-looking, it would look out of place compared to the surrounding architecture. Bridge B definitely keeps pace with other bridge designs in the valley, but does nothing to advance the beauty of the landscape. Bridge C keeps touch with the Cuyahoga Valley's bridge history with the designs of the viaduct, and does work to advance the beauty of the cityscape with the suspension arch design.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A provides a modern steel design while Bridge B and 95% of Bridge C is a drab, boring old style design.
 1 (0%)  
 Put A and C together into one bridge
 1 (0%)  
 Adds a dazzling surprise to the city skyline!
 1 (0%)  
 The bridge is an icon of what Cleveland has been and what Cleveland will be!
 1 (0%)  
 A really seems to reflect what Cleveland is about. B and C seem like another city. They just don't mesh with the bridges currently in Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Nothing about any of these designs speaks to a 'rich history', unless you are talking about the rich history of pretending to take public input on such matters.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A looks futuristic and will continue the history of exceptional bridges
 1 (0%)  
 I don't think any of the designs are works of art nor do they compare to many of the beautiful bridges we have throughout the city.
 1 (0%)  
 like the look
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is very industrial with no character. The other two provide nice lines and an interesting view.
 1 (0%)  
 The bridges in the area of the Innerbelt reflect the industrial history of the Cleveland area. There is nothing about these designs that speaks to that history. They are bland and uninspiring; worse, they take away from the gritty elegance (or at least, interesting textures) of the lift and swing bridges of the Flats.
 1 (0%)  
 Look at the existing bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is more for a city in the future, or what Cleveland WILL BE. Bridge B is a standard (not much different than what we have). And Bridge C is not CLEVELAND!
 1 (0%)  
 B and C are virtually the same boring structure with the exception of C adding the golden arches over one portion. Bridge A definately distinguishes itself as a signature structure that would add to the architectural history of the valley.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge A looks too busy underneath. bridge B looks like it belongs in Dubai bridge C looks like " welcome to our new city "
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C would bring an excellent look to Cleveland and the structures around it.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is the only structure to cause your eyes to look up and out over the city skyline. The history of our city is rooted in progressive and forward thinking individuals and organizations. In what direction do we look for a hopeful, progressive future? Up and out.....towards a hopeful future for our children, our city and neighborhoods, our sports teams, our education, medical and business institutions.
 1 (0%)  
 I like the under structure look of design A. Design C is too modern.
 1 (0%)  
 Looks beautiful without being distracting
 1 (0%)  
 B is the only bridge that does this in the truest sense. C does not respect history while A is a close second.
 1 (0%)  
 all 3 designs are "forgettable". Bride A has potential with lighting and possible addition of archways incorporated in Bridge C. Our lift bridges in the flats are spectacular pieces of architecture, the innerbelt design should be the "crown jewel", not another hohum bridge, all of which the designs currently represent.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is the only design presented that makes a statement and meets the requirement above
 1 (0%)  
 Cleveland will never have a more beutiful bridge than the current innerbelt or West 3rd street. Gone are the days of such beautiful steel creations. It should not be replaced by just concrete! If more steel was used in construction maybe our very own steelmill could run at full capacity. Bridge c with its subtle curves in its beams and the cables will add to the new look of our great city
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has historic look
 1 (0%)  
 YAWN!!!!! Really boring design with tiny "gingerbread" architectural fluff added. They all resemble the boring little bridges on the turnpike. What about pedestrial access??????
 1 (0%)  
 Where is the inspiration? Where is the design? I am so disappointed
 1 (0%)  
 indusstrial towns don't have needless enbellishments on pulic works
 1 (0%)  
 Vanilla discribes the final proposals. I am disappointed that ODOT leadership is ignoring this chance to leave a REMARKABLE piece of architecture in Cleveland. Bridge design C begins to capture that status. The other bridges are minimalist and reflect that same attitude. Look at the detail bridgebuilders incorporated at a couple of the other bridges built here at the beginning of the last century. They took chances! Please start the same.
 1 (0%)  
 They all are viable and have a appeal.
 1 (0%)  
 I believe Bridge A will be an excellent bridge for the city. It will look great traveling on and by. Its night lighting is exceptional.
 1 (0%)  
 A has character.. B is too simple. C would looks out of place in Cleveland
 1 (0%)  
 This will identify Cleveland's skyline.
 1 (0%)  
 Cleveland has a rich history and a number of classic buildings in its skyline. I think bridge A is a perfect combination of our past, vintage look and the industrial, modern flare to make it a perfect choice.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is beautiful, it's steel and made by OHIO WORKERS
 1 (0%)  
 First, ignoring the Alsenas proposal was a monumental mistake; the location of the 2 bridges now planned will negatively impact the city in many ways. As to the 3 proposed designs they fail to meet your criteria. B & C ostensibly appear to be stock concrete foundation/steel beam structures with minor embellishments; just drive north on I77 from I480 and it's much the same as far as bridges go. The raised arch of C is far to small in scale to the overall size of the span. By default, A would be a better choice. But I'd rather not see any public funds spent to construct what you've put up as qualifying designs.
 1 (0%)  
 When I see Bridge A, I am reminded not only of the Hope Memorial Bridge, but of the bridges that spanned the western part of the valley over the Cleveland Metroparks Zoo. One bridge we lost for convenience sake, I feel, the the recently finished Fulton Road bridge has done Cleveland proud in the design, and trying to maintain the great WPA project by using the arch design again. I think Bridge A also reflects that great design.
 1 (0%)  
 I love the way Bridge A accentuates the Cleveland skyline.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is the best of the three - it fits in with the industrial feel and aesthetic. Bridge B is plain boring and Bridge C with the strange architectural element does not fit the aethetic of the area at all.
 1 (0%)  
 C best meets Criteria
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A seems like the only design that has any aesthetic value and may actually make look Cleveland look a tad bit cleaner and more exciting. But maybe that's not the look we're going for. The other bridges would do well to compliment the gray, uneventful, depressed surroundings, vibe and local economy. So if we want to continue the unenergetic vibe and not put any pep in Cleveland's step, continue with one of the boring proposals. But maybe breaking this depressed status quo would be a better idea. Bridge A is the only one that even remotely has that type of flair.
 1 (0%)  
 DESIGN A IS VERY "EYE" APPEALING
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A works well with the existing bridges. Bridge B is pretty boring and C looks like tennis racquets.
 1 (0%)  
 I am very disappointed in the bland designs that were presented. There was an opportunity to create a magnificent structure along the Cuyahoga River, a breath-taking and awe-inspiring modern structure. How sad that the opportunity has been missed and the citizens and visitors to Cleveland have been presented with a very unimaginative concrete vision. Welcome to Cleveland....
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is an addition to the Cleveland skyline.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A will give the motoring public a better view of the surroundings and the night lights are very attractive..
 1 (0%)  
 Looks the best, high profile. Beautiful
 1 (0%)  
 These designs all seem too plain and none really addresses the special geographic and hsitorical aspects of this site
 1 (0%)  
 None of these bridges speak to the civic, industrial, or bridge design history of Cleveland. Only one gets it 1/2 right, and its industrial design and leaping arches does not speak to our civic heritage nor does it highlight the preponderance of bridge design in the Industrial Valley.
 1 (0%)  
 Cleveland's rich bridge design history isn't as important as the best use of the materials and techniques available today.
 1 (0%)  
 Design A is more aesthetically appealing to the eyes than are Bridges B and C
 1 (0%)  
 Gives a fresh look to the City! Really contemporary and nice. I think it adds a lot to the City landscape.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A appears more modern than the other two and very impressive from an architectural perspective.
 1 (0%)  
 while this bridge looks nice, we are in Ohio. Harsh winters will take a toll on the steel, can't imagine what rust on all those beams would like. Given that there is so much visible steel, rusting would quickly make that a very unattractive sight for a pretty long stretch.
 1 (0%)  
 All three bridges fall woefully short of this ideal. Bridges B and C, in particular, are downright eyesores. What a shame that we don't have more creative renderings. Bridge A, given the competition, barely makes the grade.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A by far is the best looking of the three, B is just a plain everyday Ohio bridge, C has the arch, but I question weather it actually is a working part of the structure or for looks, if only for looks, it a waste of tax payer's money.
 1 (0%)  
 The design is inspiring from the aesthetics that will be seen form the community.
 1 (0%)  
 this is a graceful bridge design that accomplishes the purpose and is visually pleasing
 2 (0%)  
 Cleveland and the rest of opur region look at ourselves as progressive and this design seems to be more progressive than the others.
 1 (0%)  
 The steel cables represent out history of manufacturing steel and arches give a sense of motion possibly a nod to playing a role in the automotive industry.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A incorporates steel design features that demonstrate the rich history of Cleveland's steel industry.
 1 (0%)  
 looks the most professionally designed and best matches the style of other bridges in the area
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A looks modern
 1 (0%)  
 The surrounding structures are steel trusses and most with an arch appearance. Bridge A best compliments these other structures.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has a strong classic look to it as if a century from now it will still be in use. The design is truly a modern aquaduct allowing people and commerce to span the valley .
 1 (0%)  
 These three designs are an absolute joke. Cleveland needs something beautiful. I understand wanted to contribute to the architectural history, but what would any of these add? They are simple, basic designs with essentially solid beams. TERRIBLE!
 1 (0%)  
 BRIDGE A IS MORE BEAUTIFUL AND SHOULD ENHANCE THE APPEARANCE OF THE VALLEY AS FAR AS BRIDGES ARE CONCERNED
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges b and c are standard bridges that could be anywhere. completely bland and virtually no ornamentation. I could say ugly, utilitarian. Bridge A is only slightly better, but not nearly good enough for such a prominent bridge in ohios biggest county. how do you answer that columbus and toledo have gotten much better bridges. This bridge is an insult and slap in the face to cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A's design respects the aesthetic history of the valley, recognizing Cleveland's civic, industrial and bridge design history more consistently than either Bridge B or C.
 1 (0%)  
 I believe that Bridge A is the most aesthetically pleasing and would be a great look for the Cleveland area. The other two designs seem very generic and are nothing out of the ordinary. It would be nice to have a bridge which stands out and gives Cleveland a good name.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A looks functional and safe and appealing to the eye but not too "ove the top".
 1 (0%)  
 they both look like bridges around here in the flats area
 1 (0%)  
 Beauracratic mediocrity has subverted the opportunity to dispell the national perception of Cleveland, as "The Mistake on the Lake", forward thinking and dynamic innovation in civic beauty is NOT PART of "SLOWHIO'S" approach to serving the people who reside in this area. Nothing changes if nothing changes, wether the bridge is new or old.
 1 (0%)  
 I grew up in the Charleston, SC area. They recently completed a new bridge over the Cooper River similar to "C". A huge enhancement to the downtown appeal. Let's make this truly this "the best location in the nation".
 1 (0%)  
 The open beam concept, bridge A, provide more visual interest and is more unique than the other two designs. The cable stay portion of Bridge C is really too short to make it a feature.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A conceptually looks stronger and has some character, Bridge B - just too plain, Bridge C cuts the Cleveland skyline - not pretty at all.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A highlights Cleveland. Still carries the old look of what has been and yet shows a new contemporary style. Love the blue light look at night.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C definitely maintains the aesthetic history of Cleveland's bridge design past; with a definite flare protraying Cleveland's ongoing improvements into the future.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has a "heavy, industrial age" look......that's what Cleveland is all about. Bridges B & C are too simple in design to meet the criteria. Bridge C could meet this if the "cable supports" were used all across the structure and not just at the Ontario Street end.
 1 (0%)  
 Ideally, I prefer the base and deck of A, with the above deck structure of C.
 1 (0%)  
 How much will maintanance costa VARY between the choices presented???????
 1 (0%)  
 Arches reflect the past, the curves and tapered girders reflect the present and will promote ease of maintenance and allow for addition of lighting opportunities
 1 (0%)  
 just..right.A
 1 (0%)  
 something nice for the city
 1 (0%)  
 Design A looks far more exciting than the other 2 designs.
 1 (0%)  
 Hello, In my opinion, Bridge "C"'s design would flow with the older style of building located downtown. It would blend in flawlessly.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge c modernizes Cleveland and gives a look that fits an updated look
 1 (0%)  
 The problem here, ODOT, is that you've given the general public a very small sample size with which to evaluate these "proposals." For example, what will the footprint be in the Gateway area? How will it tie into the existing street grid? While we know that ODOT does not really care what the public thinks, it would be nice before you ruin the city's gateway for the next 50 years.
 1 (0%)  
Total: 747

5. B. The new bridge should reflect consistent design themes of existing bridges in the valley, and should strive for similar attention to form and detail, while not being imitative.

How well does each design reflect the above criteria?

  
Does not meet Criteria
 Meets Criteria
Exceeds Criteria
(%)1313191836
Bridge A
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
 12345
(%)40272742
Bridge B
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
 12345
(%)2715171328
Bridge C
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
12345
Total: 1351

6. Please provide further explanation or comments regarding your selections for Question B

 see above
 2 (0%) 
 
 There are no other bridges that I know of with the high arcs built above them like bridge c proposes.
 1 (0%)  
 I disagree, the bridge is the most important and traveled, it should show sometype of difference in appearance.
 1 (0%)  
 See previous comments
 1 (0%)  
 It is not at all imitative, however bridge A does fit the flow of the city.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A would bring a new feel to the bridges of our city, but would also put a little more flair into the city.
 1 (0%)  
  
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A & B do have the same theme. When business partners come to Cleveland, never has one said, "what a great bridge". We need another look.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C would be a great start to a new Cleveland beginning. An architectural bridge to bring notoriety to downtown. A bridge worth looking at.
 1 (0%)  
 see comments above
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A, overall, looks very similar to the current bridge.  Bridge B's design, while attractive, doesn't really seem to bring on a feeling of growth/change that the city wishes to achieve on the Cuyahoga.  Bridge C, again, hands-down is the best choice.  The Cuyahoga has many bridges with 'arches' so to speak, and this bridge would fit in nicely from a modern point of view.
 1 (0%)  
 Choice A reflects and compliments the other bridges in our city. It fits into place, but at the same time it has a new twist.
 1 (0%)  
 Both Bridge A and B are much too imitative. In particular, the lighting package on Bridge B echoes the Detroit Superior bridge. Bridge B, in particular, feels like an echo of every industrial innerbelt bridge ever built with no inspiration to it.
 1 (0%)  
 It allows for you to see that it is new but, still keeping it's integraty
 1 (0%)  
 Both bridge B and C are boring.
 1 (0%)  
 None of the bridges are consistent with design themes of the Main Avenue Bridge, Veterans Memorial Bridge, or the Hope Memorial Bridge. Bridge A paid the most attention to form and detail, but it is still uninspiring.
 1 (0%)  
 I like the modern aspect of Bridge A. Bridge C is flashy but I feel it would block the view of downtown upon arrival. Bridge A seems to be the most suitable for enhancing the city skyline.
 1 (0%)  
 These bridges are just another steel and concrete monstrosity added to the Cleveland skyline. They blend in but match nothing.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A definitely reflects consistent design themes matching existing bridges in the valley without looking like a copy cat.  It has similar features but looks different and clean.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is immitative. There is nothing new about it.
 1 (0%)  
  The arches in C do not seem to fit in what I expect to see in NE Ohio.
 1 (0%)  
 The main span over the river should stand out - the other spans can reflect existing designs of nearby bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A does reflect the solid nature of other bridges in the Cuyahoga Valley, and strongly recalls some of the traditional bridges in the northeast Ohio area, such as the Fulton Road bridge, the Hilliard Avenue Bridge over the Rocky River, and even recalls the old Superior Viaduct over the Cuyahoga. Bridge B and C pretty much look like standard highway bridges, much like the Ohio Turnpike bridges over the lower Cuyahoga Valley, and look utterly imitative, other than the unique bridge aspect of Bridge C over Ontario Avenue
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A looks like a clone of what we already have. Bridge B looks very slightly more appealing. Bridge C looks the best!
 1 (0%)  
 all three look similar, yet 3 just gives a little better.
 1 (0%)  
 I don't think there's a really anything to discuss here, A matches the best, while that may not be the best choice.
 1 (0%)  
 Yep, they look like every other boring bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 It meets the criteria of plain, boring and NOT very unique!
 1 (0%)  
 Any of the three would do the city/state proud, I still prefer C
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A looks similar to other bridges.  Bridge B is too boring.  Bridge C adds a new flair to the many bridges in Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 That the new bridge should reflect other bridges in the valley is ridiculous. On that count, the boring bridge B exceeds the boring criteria - and the nicer bridges A and C fail. Give me a break. This new bridge should really look nothing like the existing bridges. Go out on a limb ODOT
 1 (0%)  
 We need to do someting different, to make people want to drive over the bridge, to have it as an important part of our skyline.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A may not be as dramatic as some have hoped for, but it's open construction does tie in well with the Lorain-Carnegie Bridge; it has a traditional look and feel that "fits" the environment, and is aesthetically appealing (especially illuminated at night). Bridge B is far too modern, and frankly boring. It adds little the architectural heritage of the valley. Bridge C's inclusion of arches on the Ontario end tie will with the architecture of Progressive Field, but the remainder of the bridge seems to be an afterthought. The most important view of the bridge will be the span across the valley, not the approach on only one end.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge b is very bland; Bridge A has the most character, esp if lit up at night. Like the cables in bridge C
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge As arched design reflects the design of other nearby bridges, yet brings a modern look with it.
 1 (0%)  
 I love the lighting on bridge A. Part of what I love to see when I come into town at night.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is reminiscent of some of the other bridges in the area due to the arched structures under the deck. B is elegant and arguably consistent, but looks imitative. C is similar to B except for the striking arches.
 1 (0%)  
 Design B is actually the most innocuous and least offensive with respect to the other bridges in the valley. Designs A and C appear to be cynical and lackluster interpretations of good bridge design.
 1 (0%)  
 Looks like a bridge
 1 (0%)  
 The use of curves in the Bridge A effectively repeats the themes of the valley while not being imitative. Bridges B and C once again seem to imitate standard highway bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 This bridge is definitely going to be one of a kind as it is unique to the luxury, class, and antiquities of contemporary Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 All the bridges meet the critera.
 1 (0%)  
 We have no bridges with arches as Bridge C shows. Bridge B has pictures with construction - not pretty at all
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A's structure is similar to others in the area, but has its own uniqueness Bridge B doesn't fit well with the other bridges in the area Bridge C is far from similar to anything else in the area.
 1 (0%)  
 I think "C" is way too over the top for the area and would look out of place. I think "B" is boring...
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A's design looks polished and professional with keeping with the color blue from the night picture.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C has a fresh appearance, not what Cleveland is. We need fresh designs to make Cleveland stand out, not look the same as it always has.
 1 (0%)  
 Why does it have to meet design themes of existing bridges?
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B looks too much like every other steel girder bridge that gets built. for this bridge and project, ODOT needs to a little out of the box with the bridge design.
 1 (0%)  
 Once again, Bridge B is a very boring choice and looks like it imitates old architecture. Bridge A is a somewhat similar design to some of the older bridges, but has a nice look of sophistication. Bridge C is a very nice design, but stands out a little too much with the eye catching support structures.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is basic and plain. It does not add any unique or unusual to the city's architecture.
 1 (0%)  
 The Bridge A design certainly draws inspiration from a similar design for the Lakeshore freeway bridge. So the design consistency is there, but this design can also stand on its own merits. Design B look like million of other bridges, with nothing to set it apart. Bridge C would certainly be different for downtown Cleveland, but may stand out like a sore thumb next to the other bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 The other three main bridges over the river (Main Avenue, Detroit-Superior, and Lorain-Carnegie all have arched undersides. The main spans of Bridges B and C are 1970s style concrete slabs.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is too typical, it resembles many other bridges. Bridge A has a twist making it more interesting while Bridge C breaks out of the box and is more unique then most in the area.
 1 (0%)  
 The bridge should be beautiful and blend in.
 1 (0%)  
 There is no universally consistent design theme for the existing bridges. This should not be a criteria. Design A comes closest to mimicking features of several other bridges, however.
 1 (0%)  
 The piers on Bridge C have the best design. Bridge B is ugly. Bridge A is acceptable.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A stays with the theme of an open span. Bridge B and C are tired and boring. None of Cleveland's bridges share this characteristic.
 1 (0%)  
 Again, Bridge B is dull and unimaginative. It imitates other mundane bridges. Bridge C is a nice design. I only wish the cabled area were larger and spanned the whole bridge, but it still creates a nice image. Bridge A is much more traditional, but sleek and attractive to the eye. Both A and C will fit well into the fabric of bridges in the valley.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C only fell short on this criteria only to the extent of the arches. I really don't like those arches.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A: represents a slight upgrade overall with lighting under the bridge and the unique pillars while maintaining similar appeal to the other structures in the area. Bridge B: represents similar look and appeal while being imitative. Bridge C: brings a different appeal with the implementation of the arches while still remaining consistent with the other structures in the area.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is the only innovative and bold design in the competition. The other two designs are somewhat to very stale and reflect the drab, current design of the existing innerbelt bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A fits in with the rest of the bridges, while providing interest without completely distracting from the rest of the structures.
 1 (0%)  
 These bridge designs do not compliment or add anything to the Cleveland skyline or existing bridges - they appear to be be very plain with no architectural features - Bridge B imitates a basic highway bridge !
 1 (0%)  
 Both bridges b and c just look too stark and have no personality. Bridge A has a personality
 1 (0%)  
 See comments above
 2 (0%) 
 
 WHY DOES IT HAVE TO BE CONSISTENT? WHY CANT IT BE DIFFERENT?
 1 (0%)  
 They all seem to have similar design themes to existing bridges, but this is our time to do something new and fresh, so to me Bridge C stands out from the rest.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is an I-490 rehash. Bridge A mimics the Hope and existing bridge in a small way. Bridge C's arch would be one of a kind.
 1 (0%)  
 All three of these bridge concepts (renderings) are very modest. I don't see any reflection of Cleveland, Valley, Industry, Ohio, Ethnic, history in any of these. WE might be at the mercy of the rendering but a project like this demands a majestic design.
 1 (0%)  
 Buildings are old 1900 era, bridge needs updated look.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B looks like a longer version of the Valley View bridge on 480 and does very little to inspire. Bridge C, although very interesting, does not lend itself well to tying into the existing bridges in the area. It is much more reminiscent of San Francisco that it is of Cleveland. AGain, Design A completely embodies everything that IS Cleveland, stell beams, trusses etc...
 1 (0%)  
 This question is tricky because it's assuming you enjoy the current bridge designs. I persontally think most of our bridges are boring.
 1 (0%)  
 It says Hey Look at Me!
 1 (0%)  
 I would love to see bridge B's design while still incorporating Bridge C's high wire cable and arch near Progressive Field. Cleveland is the city to be in! lets keep it hip and modern like the rest of the repaved streets!
 1 (0%)  
 A & B have zero creativity. They look like any other bridge in any city in the world.
 1 (0%)  
 the reason i put bridge C as it does not meet bec. I am GLAD it doesn't meet the existing bridges. A and B resemble the boring look of our present bridges. Hats off to C for thinking outside the box.
 1 (0%)  
 I disagree with the statement in question B. The new bridge ought to be something completely different and new. Bridge C exceeds that criteria.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is distinctive, but not flashy. Bridge B is dull, and 90% of bridge C is the same as B, only with 1 fancy approach bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 A has elements that fit with current structures. B looks like every other boring bridge on the freeway system C trys with the arch but the rest of the design looks like every other freeway bridge
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B looks too much like every bridge around town - Bridge A is slightly better in offering a different structure - Bridge C is definitely different for other bridges aesthetically, but I think breaks the design ina good way
 1 (0%)  
 Similar attention to form and detail? No way. But Bridge B makes a little bit of an attempt in the column details.
 1 (0%)  
 A & B ARE TOO PLAIN
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is mundane, looking like generic bridges across the country. Bridge C is imitative of ones found in other cities. Only Bridge A fits all suggested criteria.
 1 (0%)  
 the constant is expressed it its end to end status
 1 (0%)  
 modern but similar to other bridges
 1 (0%)  
 consistent design themes? what majore city worries about whether or not a bridge is different. Does the golden gate look like any other bridge in San Fran?
 1 (0%)  
 I don't really like the design. All the lines on the bottom of the bridge give me a headache.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is both undistinguished and unremarkable. It does nothing to lift the soul or inspire civic pride. It's as unimaginative and boring as the Valley View bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has a design scheme similar to that of the old bridge, but it also seems the most innovative. It shows progress for the city without belittling the gritty but gorgeous industrial past.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is "imitative" of most bridges throughout the US.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A and B seem to be closest to the bridges I have seen in the area while Bridge C has arches I have not noticed on other bridges traveled in the area.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A & B is too imitative.
 1 (0%)  
 See above
 2 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A to me is imitative of what already exists while the arch of C is reflective of the other bridges but adding a new element unseen. If somehow bridge A open beams and the arch of bridge C could be combined then we would have a beautiful bridge to be proud of!
 1 (0%)  
 Not sure that I see any similarity of existing bridges in C. I'm also confused with this design. The third image in C's PDF file looks nothing like the first two (where are the arches?); is that even the same bridge? Is there just one set of arches? What's with the second lane of traffic running underneath it by Progressive Field?
 1 (0%)  
 Definately not imitative.
 1 (0%)  
 As I stated in question A. The different design themes of arch truss, sweeping arch, straight truss and the various lift bridges. The triangular truss of Bridge A still has the steel design with a different geometric shape.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A & C may reflect existing bridges but Bridge B is not all that different from those we already have. Bridge A is not as imitative but both are, more or less, the same old same old.
 1 (0%)  
 Many of the old bridges in Cleveland have really unique designs and show some character. I feel bridge A is the only bridge that follows that criteria.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is the best blending into the Cleveland environment, yet also being a one of a kind theme.
 1 (0%)  
 The c design takes a different step in keeping with the theme of the road it goes east to west in a dramatic design
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge (a) is the closest to the existing bridge without similar failure problems.
 1 (0%)  
 Has a subtle yet visible theme .
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A again meets the criteria through its design that mimics traditional design but has a unique flair. Bridge B meets the criteria as well but with its cleaner lines depart from other bridges in the valley. Bridge C is a radical departure from the other bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 As a working person, this bridge to me represents the working person in our area. Good looking and yet something of pride.
 1 (0%)  
 The arches on Bridge C are definitely not imitative. Bridge A is trying to imitate the old style concrete arches on the old bridges, but it fails.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A looks almost like the one being replaced but is that really good not moving forward ? Bridge C Looks different than most of our bridges but will add diversity to all the bridges
 1 (0%)  
 ?????????
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is more harmonious with the other bridges within the valley. Bridge C mimics the arch of the Detroit-Superior Bridge, but in such an inferior way as to detract from the overall effect.
 1 (0%)  
 A amd B are similar to other bridges in the valley and show no real variation on the theme.. Again, this is an oppurtunity for Cleveland to define itself...
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C complements clevelands other bridges while having a unique design which helps it stand out as well
 1 (0%)  
 They all meet the above criteria.
 1 (0%)  
 Again, lets have a new begining and progress instead of being stuck with the same old.
 1 (0%)  
 I believe they are all consistent design themes of existing bridges; however, that can be pretty plain. That is where C exceeds criteria.... the arch is an amazing addition to a perfectly consistent design theme.
 1 (0%)  
 UNFORTUNATELY the designs DO meet these criteria. Why would we want a structure that looks like all the others? Give us something unique that excites people when they drive on it!
 1 (0%)  
 n/a I do not agree with the idea of keeping this the same as the other bridges. This is supposed to be new and invigorating to Cleveland and to its citizens. Lets have something that everyone can talk about and get to know when they see Cleveland on google map.
 1 (0%)  
 Although they all meet this criteria the new designs should be something innovative and imaginative
 1 (0%)  
 as stated above i think the design and size of bridge a fill the area best. bridge b is beautiful but is too narrow for the space. i find the raised design feature of bridge is too distracting when driving over it. i have found the same problem exists when i drive over the bridge in toledo
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is the BEST design futuristic just what Cleveland needs!
 1 (0%)  
 It doesn't matter to me If this were an important issue, it wold be built of grey or red steel, unpainted.
 1 (0%)  
 If we wanted everything to look the same, then A and B would be perfect, but I really think Cleveland needs to modernize and try for some aesthetics.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge "C" may not look like other bridges in the area, but is that a "bad" thing? I think not!
 1 (0%)  
 It is the biggest bridge around it should stand out.
 1 (0%)  
 the bridge should reflect consistent themes of existing bridges, but at the same time, add a feature that is completely different and stands out.
 1 (0%)  
 Option C does not imitate the surroundings as much as the others-but who cares don't we want something that stands out or makes our city look good?
 1 (0%)  
 Both bridges A and B are too similar to existing bridges. Bridge C adds to the variety of bridges downtown.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has an appeal that is consistent across the entire span; it is complementary of the other bridges, Lorain Ave in particular. It also offers a naturally contemporary visual extension of the recently rebuilt and historically representative Fulton Rd bridge farther south. It is stimulating and new without being out of character with the city. Bridge C, while unique for Cleveland, is evocative of many other designs nationally and internationally, and doesn't really reflect the city's character. More importantly, aside from the cable arches portrayed near Jacobs field, most of the bridge is bland and looks like a standard interstate bridge.The cable arches look like an afterthought designed to attract ODOT's (and the public's) attention, instead of a genuine and comprehensive attention to detail that is complementary "without being imitative." Bridge A drawings appear to fully integrate form and function. It's not clear why bridge B is an option at all - either the drawings don't properly display its unique design, or it's just a bland design.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A uses modern design both on the spans, underbelly the pillars/colums are seperated enough as not to block views of the lake, river and park
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A stands head & shoulders as the front runner. Bridge B is acceptable but not inspiring, almost seems to try and camouflage the underside of the bridge which historically can prove deadly if not visible...sensitive subject. Bridge C seems to be trying too hard to change the skyline rather than become an integral part of what already exists or compliment what already exists.
 1 (0%)  
 c has that silly look. Bridge A.
 1 (0%)  
 I understand city council wanted to see a good suspension bridge design (hell, even I did too) to add that iconic landmark to this city. But it doesn't work in this design. Most of Bridge B & C look like the Valley View bridge anyway and doesn't offer iconic-like detail like Bridge A offers for the ENTIRE span of the bridge. You can clearly see in the Bridge B photo where the new bridge gets drowned out by the detail of the other bridge further in the distance. It's like it's not even there.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C - Steel arch best complements the exposed steel structural supports of our many mechanical bridges, shoreway bridge, and Progressive Field.
 1 (0%)  
 What do you want WPA?
 1 (0%)  
 Picture B is beautiful I loved it it fits downtown
 1 (0%)  
 They're all pretty equally boring. So I'm sure they meet this specific criteria.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is not imitative because of the arches but reflects the design themes of other existing bridges because of the support structure
 1 (0%)  
 Consistent design themes? This is getting close to the root of the problem: Cleveland currently enjoys diversity in bridges not consistency. This isn't a living room in a suburban house that should match the design aesthetic of the family room nor is it , the lobby of a commercial building that must blend with the balance of the building. Without this wet blanket of 'criteria' the bridge could have become something special or even extraordinary.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge "A" is the only one that reflect the past rugged desgn with the new modern design.
 1 (0%)  
 A clearly does this the best. B and C look out of place in Cleveland's rich and visually textured industrial valley.
 1 (0%)  
 The only thing the new bridge should have that the old bridge has is the columns holding the bridge up. the current design is drab at best. The new bridge should reflect the hope and dreams we have for the future, and we need to have a bridge Cleveland is proud of, and a design that takes our visitor's breath away.
 1 (0%)  
 Same as comment A.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A exceeds the consistant design theme as required.
 1 (0%)  
 A is identical in a modern way to most existing bridges. B is still BORING while it meets the idea of being similar to bridges in the area. C is totally different from anything in the area....
 1 (0%)  
 I found Bridge A to be a bit too modern and not at all aesthetically complementary to the existing bridges and downtown skyline. Bridges B & C look like typical freeways and are not at all interesting or unique.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C does remind one of the Detriot-Superior bridge that is a local favorite. Bridge B just blends in without destinction or contrast. Bridge A too busy and competing for attention with the existing bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is not an outrageous change from things seen below the inner-belt bridge along the river.
 1 (0%)  
 How can you be consistent without being somewhat imitative? Besides, the current Lorain-Carnegie and Detroit-Superior bridges look NOTHING like each other.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A reminds me of other bridges in Cleveland. The other choices pale in comparison.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges B and C are exact copies of existing bridge designs, except for a short part of a span of bridge C.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge c has a retro feel that capture both old and new themes of the city. it would also make a statement about the uniqueness of the city. Bridge a and b are not that exceptional. They do not represent a design that seems much more than a servicable bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 bad question
 1 (0%)  
 "C" is the most innovative with "A" a close second. I find "B" boring.
 1 (0%)  
 it is a simple arch, but adds to the skyline
 1 (0%)  
 It seems question B and question C contradict themselves. Go forward or reflect the past? Choose one.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A looks almost identical to the Detroit Superoir bridge. Bridge B shares the same qualities, but looks just like the existing innerbelt bridge at a glance. Neither Bridges A nor B make much of a statement as this bridge serves as a gateway into the city.
 1 (0%)  
 Again, boring. The best bridge is the Superior/Detroit bridge. Nevertheless, ODOT is way to conservative. How about something that blends with Progressive Field and the Q?
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is too plain and lacks character.
 1 (0%)  
 A strong bridge with the beautiful security arches holding the 2 areas together. I can not see rusting hitting it at all since it will be easily maintained.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A's bottom reflects visual interest.
 1 (0%)  
 Love Bridge A if it will be lit up in blue at night.
 1 (0%)  
 Cleveland has beautiful bridges. None of these compare, complement, or even come close to what we currently have. I consider the current interbelt bridge to be the ugliest of the Cleveland bridges. It is still better than the current proposals in that it provides something interesting underneath. Compare these designs to the Lorain-Carnegie bridge ("Hope Memorial"), the Detroit-Superior Bridge ("Veterans Memorial Bridge") and then situate them next to all the amazing smaller bridges downtown - the railroad bridges over the Cuyahoga River, the Center Street Bridge, etc. The best of these bridges - Bridge C - looks like a watered-down version of the Detroit-Superior Bridge, meaning that it adds little to the landscape or current design. The worst - Bridge B - looks like it shouldn't even be in a historical city. It should be the bridge that connects man-made islands off the United Arab Emirates. I feel as if the designers spent no time in Downtown Cleveland. Had they spent 10 minutes in the flats, looking out over the bridges, and then brought in sixth graders, they could have come up with something more suited to the Cleveland atmosphere.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C reminds me of the bridges added to the tow-path project in Independence. The tow-path bridges are beautiful to view and create a desire in me to discover where they lead. I believe Bridge C would create a renewed enthusiasm toward Cleveland and through its design, create a driven curiosity to discover the richness that Cleveland has to offer.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has some pleasing aesthetic features that set it apart, but they're all below the traffic deck. I strongly believe that there needs to be a centerpiece feature that draws the viewer's eye. But I also think there should be a unique design feature that spans the whole bridge as well. Perhaps some combination of the design themes of Bridges A and C.
 1 (0%)  
 The images of Bridge C are confusing - one shows no arches, one shows traffic between arches and one shows traffic under the arches...? It really makes it hard to evaluate the design. Bridge A is in keeping with a traditional design of a Cleveland bridge with a modern sense of design.
 1 (0%)  
 Throw out these 3 designs and get something decent, The taxpayers deserve better
 1 (0%)  
 See my previous comments above.
 1 (0%)  
 The first two are very imitative and have no vertical features that make it attractive like C does.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A exceeds this criteria.
 1 (0%)  
 It appears that engineers had more say in the design than architects or anyone with any sense of aesthetics. Even bridge "C" has been "done before" in other cities.
 1 (0%)  
 A and B offer a modern, somewhat plain approach which can be found anywhere in the city (or turnpike). C at least has some visual attraction.
 1 (0%)  
 I have never seen anything like Bridge C. I can't say the same for the two others.
 1 (0%)  
 but yet you want us to consider "the history" without being "imitative"? again..silly...
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge a seems to be the most consistent with other bridges in the valley. The other two both seem similar in style to I480 bridge design.
 1 (0%)  
  Bridge c looks more expensive to maintain. also blocks view.
 1 (0%)  
 A flat roadway (nothing above the roadway) does not fit.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A stands alone in it's design.
 1 (0%)  
 I believe bridge "B" is within the relaltivity of existing valley bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 the bridges further south (e.g. by the zoo) offer clear examples of what design A emulates.
 1 (0%)  
 I'm not even sure I agree with the comment to begin with. Why not go outside of what we normally see. That's why I like Bridge C so much.
 1 (0%)  
 No bridge captures this element at all, and hope the board considers this replacement bridge we'll be the bridge travelers (business and pleasure) will be driving across. We need a bridge that is more than a concrete span. Go see Boston's bridges for example.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A matches existing & adjacent bridge the best
 1 (0%)  
 From the three choices, I see "A" as the best choice.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A pays homage to the existing bridges and the city's history with a pleasing update of the existing structure. Bridge B looks like it was transplanted from boring Los Angeles, and bridge C just doesn't come to the same level of interest as A does in spite of its small arches.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge "B" looks fine, I am just concerned about pressure points on the concrete. Bridge "C" decking look plain, the top just looks goofy with the things sticking up on the sides.
 1 (0%)  
 I prefer Bridge C.
 2 (0%) 
 
 I don't think the design of bridge C meets the criteria for existing bridges in cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is too similar to the present design while Bridge B is bland and will be an old design by the time it's completed.
 1 (0%)  
 A - this is something that looks similar to what we may have seen around cleveland. This is still unique because there is not a lot of diversity in the looks of Bridge design around the city. This looks similar but stands out in its own way. B - I do not like the look of this. If Cleveland is looking for something boring and something that is an eye sore, this would be the bridge they should pick. I do not think that this reflects Cleveland's creative side that everyone knows we have. C - I think this proposal is something that Cleveland has never seen before. This is very new, fresh, and something that would express the creativeness of the city. I like this the best. I am part of the younger generation though, 21, and i like the fresh new look of things. I think this would stand out and be something that people would not mind looking at for the many year to come. This would be something that people could easily describe by the arches, as this would be the first bridge with this design with in the surrounding city areas, as to my knowledge, I could be wrong.
 1 (0%)  
 B and C do not meet the valleys themes. A is in context and inspirational
 1 (0%)  
 Its in keeping of the valley's rich design themes.
 1 (0%)  
 A does well with existing bridges B also does well but imitative C would be out of place
 1 (0%)  
 comes close to matching the other bridges in the county. 480, and the Detroit superior have similar structure
 1 (0%)  
 Being simple but yet more extraordinary is Cleveland. Simple is good. It is less clutter, and not a lot of activity. Bridges B and C show too much activity making it look cluttered. Bridge A represents simple with elegance.
 1 (0%)  
 All three look like any other bridge. If the goal was to "not be imitative," they failed miserably.
 1 (0%)  
 a and b are very imitative of current bridges
 1 (0%)  
 Once again, the Department failed miserably again. None of the designs reflects any design themes of existing bridges of the valley. Maybe the I-480 bridge over Valley View. How generic & bland. Again, a huge disappointment. Just another Cleveland joke. Why does ODOT always treat Cleveland & northeast Ohio as the "red-headed stepchild" of the state? Why aren't there design alternatives available for the Innerbelt Bridge similar to those design alternatives offered for the Brent Spence Bridge Corridor Project in Cincinnati? For those interested, check out www.brentspencebridgecorridor.com.
 1 (0%)  
 They look very plain, ordinary, and retro without anything being interesting about them......so I'd say you met your criteria in a bad way.
 1 (0%)  
 C, my favorite, reflects the roundness for Progressive Field, as you see it coming.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is progressive yet has me ressembles to other bridges. B & C are a Blah immitation of 480 except the arches.
 1 (0%)  
 Think about this - the existing bridges such as the swing bridges were "state of the art" in their time. So why would we accept proposals that look backward and not forward.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is in the list for filler. Boooooorrring.
 1 (0%)  
 We have great bridges downtown and this cheaping of this bridge will not fitt well or make the city look goo.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A stands out slightly from the other bridges, while both Bridge B and C are more imitative of other surrounding bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 It fits in.
 1 (0%)  
 B is typically ancient and old fashioned
 1 (0%)  
 Stylish and flows nicely.
 1 (0%)  
 All 3 are boring designs. The short segment of Bridge 3 with the above surface aspect is deceiving because the interesting portion is very small compared to the overall length, not to mention that fact that it appears to obscure the view of the stadium
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A fits, stick to the night-lighting and it will be a lovely addition to the city. Cleveland, forge ahead, full speed ahead!
 1 (0%)  
 While none are imitative, bridge A is closest to meeting the design themes of existing bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C with it's short cable arches lacks a finished look. It give the impression of "couldn't finish it....ran out of money"!
 1 (0%)  
 Once again the only one that is even remotely reflective of the structures in the area is bridge A, and a lot more could be done to add some character, it is by far not acceptable overall though.
 1 (0%)  
 All the bridges meet matching the area it's in - Bridge A is my favorite, for clean lines, yet with a nod for our city. Bridge c attempts to do this, but I think it's a bit too over the top.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C may not reflect what is below but then again, maybe we need to change what is "below".
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge 'A' and 'B' meet this criteria but they're boring.
 1 (0%)  
 All the large Cleveland bridges have stringers and trusses. Bridges B and C do not. Bridge A does and the more I look at it the more it grows on me. it still could use either a more deco or a metal flair.
 1 (0%)  
 we need some new attactive architecture in this city. Not the same old dull lines.
 1 (0%)  
 I cannot think of any bridges around Cleveland that are anything like Bridge C (with the "wings"). Don't get me wrong, it is nice, but kinda flashy at the one point of it. Bridge B is a standard, run-of-the-mill design that is fitting for about half (if not more) of the bridges around the area. Bridge A (although I like it so) does have some similarities with some of the other bridges in the area. It almost could reflect the way some of the railroad bridges look.
 1 (0%)  
 "B" is similar in design to the 33 year old I-480 bridge spans if the artist rendering is true- probably not a bad thing.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C will be an attraction yet not a hinderance to the skyline.
 1 (0%)  
 Lacks creativity
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B just has the same old flow of Cleveland, I am looking for Cleveland to take a new step. One that "defines" cleveland like Bridge A or C.
 1 (0%)  
 They all look like they could fit in with the skyline, without blending in
 1 (0%)  
 I'm not fond of the design, find it rather plain and do not think it adds to the city. It seems like a design that might be less memorable for visitors or those new to the area. Seems like a much more functional design.
 1 (0%)  
 I feel all 3 bridges look very plain and bridge like, but #3 just has that little extra flair to add to out skyline (or lack there of)
 1 (0%)  
 Again Bridges A & B are more reflective of the current bridge and architectural designs of existing bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 the bridges in the valley are also getting old and in need of replacement. Let's get on with it with a more modern design and hopefully the city will follow suit with the other bridges in the valley.
 1 (0%)  
 Both Bridge B and C have the most consistent design with the existing bridges in the valley but Bridge C has more aesthetic look.
 1 (0%)  
 I have never seen anyone care about the bottom of the bridge. The only bridge these 3 designs is like is the shoreway bridge which can't be any plainer and dissapointing as well
 1 (0%)  
 A looks the best
 1 (0%)  
 A and B are thoroughly imitative. While they are consistent with other bridges, these bridges are unsightly and should not be modeled after at all. C is a welcome departure from these.
 1 (0%)  
 for some reason it seems like the bad parts of the existing bridges were emulated while the good parts were ignored.
 1 (0%)  
 Design C draws attention to the imagination used in the construction of the Basketball and Baseball arenas along Ontario. Also the substructure reflects many of the other bridges in the Cuyahoga River Valley
 1 (0%)  
 best of the 3 ~ wish it were more dramatic like the new bridge in toledo
 1 (0%)  
 Please see comments above.
 1 (0%)  
  See above comments.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is similar to the current design but different from the other bridges in the valley. Bridge B bland design not much attention to form or detail. Bridge C is definitely off the chart as being out of place for the valley.
 1 (0%)  
 As per my above remark, Design C is the only one with a slight innovation.. And why should it reflect "consistent designs"? Yes, we have some interesting bridges, but rather boring bridges when you look at designs such as by Calatrava, or the new Zakim Bunker Hill Bridge in Boston. Why not be bold?
 1 (0%)  
 Why have a fancy new bridge if it mimics all the others around it. Bridge C is different enough to stand out but still looks like it belongs.
 1 (0%)  
 Design B is the least imaginative of the three. It merely replicates the existing structure. Please don't do this! The arching span of design C is like nothing we have. It is the exact kind of inspiration the city needs.
 1 (0%)  
 See question A.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C makes the city what it should be and can be.
 1 (0%)  
 Refer to my comments on question A.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is boring and is maybe too imitative. C is extremely different.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge A finshes what bridge b tried to do and bridge c has no place in ohio let alone Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 It seems to blend all bridges together with it's defined form.
 1 (0%)  
 they all work well
 1 (0%)  
 Again, all these bridges besides C look like all the other bridgers in some shape of form. If that's the goal, then these are all the similar and disappointing from someone who uses the bridge with frequency
 1 (0%)  
 C looks awesome, and A looks pretty cool. B is boring.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A looks like a simple replacement for the existing structure. As stated above, Bridge B seems to greatly imitate the I480 bridge just east of the I77 interchange. Bridge C adequately captures existing design themes, but advances them with a greater feeling of comfort, i.e., like hands holding the passing vehicles.
 1 (0%)  
 Why do you not want to stick out? This bridge is being built in 2012, so why be ashamed of advanced technology and innovative engineering.
 1 (0%)  
 So dull and boring!
 1 (0%)  
 the basic design of B and C fit the other bridges in the valley. A is too much of a departure.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C has a modern style when compared to the other bridges. Bridges A and B better fits the theme.
 1 (0%)  
 While bridge B continues the current architectural theme, bridge C could jump start a new visual history in the gateway neighborhood.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C would offer the biggest change to the design themes of current bridges in the valley.
 1 (0%)  
 To me, Bridge A and B imitate existing bridges too closely. To me, Bridge C most represents the changes in elevation associated with a valley.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A&B imitate the other bridges because there NEW and there the innerbelt that they should get MORE attention while they look the same. Bridge C doesn't reflect the other brigdes, but at least it doesn't get more attention because it's the INNERBELT, it gets more attention because of its cable that supports the road deck.
 1 (0%)  
 Forget EXISTING bridge designs. That is an inappropriate criteria. Who says it needs to reflect existing designs?
 1 (0%)  
 Well, neither A or C looks like any of the other existing bridges, but that's a good thing. B does look average, like the other bridges, but I think it if you're trying to amp up Cleveland, it should look fresh and different.
 1 (0%)  
 BRIDGE A IS BEST.
 1 (0%)  
 LOVE THE UNDERCARRIAGE OF A,
 1 (0%)  
 Again, who is saying the new bridge should reflect consistent design themes? Let's build the coolest and most technologically advanced bridge, no matter if it "matches" what's been done already or not. Face the facts, Cleveland needs a facelift. Let's do something uber cool that nobody else has done.
 1 (0%)  
 Other than the misplaced cable-stayed arch, none of these designs show imagination. All are imitative of old and tired bridge designs. None are unique or inventive.
 1 (0%)  
 Not very familiar with valley bridges. I drive mostly accross the innerbelt and see the city bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is unique to downtown Cleveland and by far the best option.
 1 (0%)  
 Did ANYBODY look at the other bridges before coming up with this trash?
 1 (0%)  
 again, c does not match the design theme of ANY of the existing, boring bridges. a & b would be an almost invisible addition to our existing collection of bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 Again, with that as a criteria, the bridge designs did not have to live up too much. Who at ODOT is responsible for formulating these criteria? No wonder the designs are so bland.
 1 (0%)  
 cleveland was an Industrial giant. We need to get back to this either with new smal companies making the next decades leeading prducts or we are toast. Look at the new little Talmage Duop Electric ar company. You think they wil stay arounf with our anti busness taxes structure in Ohio. Come on look around yourself eveone is moving their factories to Like Norht Carolina, South Carolina, Tenessee, Alabama pro work states. Come on Ohio get back in the game before we are all out of work.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B means 'more' to me, its big and I like that and the Cable look to Bridge C is impressive as well. I just prefer Bridge A because it looks impressive the entire distance, thats important. Cable rods on Bridge A would be perfect
 1 (0%)  
 I think all the bridges could exist with the existing structures. I think that Bridge A and C are the best fitting.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A closely resembles other bridges over the flats nonetheless is reflective of the designs but not original. Bridge B offer no change in design when compared tot he current innerbelt bridge, whereas Bridge C is completely original to the area much like every bridge prior to it was a first of its kind in Cleveland, and I believe to take 12 years and spend at least 450 million USD on the bridge, it should maintain the track record of something awe inspiring.
 1 (0%)  
 I think that bridge C is the most like the bridges down in the valley but will be much bigger.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge c looks the best, by far.
 1 (0%)  
 Once again, A and B do this very well. They are conservative, efficiently designed bridges. However, there is no flare to them. Bridge C has a "look at me" aspect. Nothing wrong with uniformity, but standing out is what draws attention to the area.
 1 (0%)  
 Nothing exciting or interesting. Boring, boring, boring. What a waste of an opportunity to make this a visual image of the city. We need a visual image badly.
 1 (0%)  
 this design is an exhausted attempt at making cleveland a more attractive city.
 1 (0%)  
 Actually, if the idea here is not to imitate Hope or Veterans they all met that criteria. These designs will never be confused with those classics.
 1 (0%)  
 Both Bridge A & B are very safe-plays. While they would be the "new thing" when built, neither would hold as a scenic attraction to Cleveland. Bridge C has a traditional base but also has a great updated look to it and stands out from the other bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A clearly is the most consistent of the choices with regards to aesthetic history of the city. It is consistent with the city's other bridges and is the most classic with regard to its architecture. The other designs look very modern. I would stick with a classic style, not only because it visually conforms with the rest of the city (as opposed to sticking out), but also because I believe that a traditional city look is more visually appealing (for what it's worth, I am 28). Additionally, Bridge A appears to have the least amount of waste or unnecessary elements. Environmentally friendly LED lighting will give this classic bridge a beautiful and elegant look after dark.
 1 (0%)  
 If B reflects design themes of existing bridges, we have way to many boring utilitarian bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is the only one with any flair
 1 (0%)  
 I love the way Bridge A looks. I think it would look even better if you could put the bars or whatever you call them in Bridge C on there
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B gives us what we already have but more lanes for less congestion, seperate bridges for direction which is great, again to minimze on lookers of there is an accident in the other direction and people are trying to gawk.
 1 (0%)  
 All bridges appear to meet the criteria. Bridges A and C definitely add an attention to form and detail. Bridge B is bland and will not create interest or pride in the city.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A fits in with Cleveland while Bridge B is just too plain and C just doesn't seem representative of our city at all. It looks like the makings of a roller coaster ride
 1 (0%)  
 Neither A nor B look anything like the creative bridges in our area. They look like boring Interstate underpasses.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B makes me angry.
 1 (0%)  
 A is an attractive, clean look. B is too basic, lacks personality C intrudes on the skyline, too loud
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B looks cheap and C looks does not fit in Cleveland. Bridge A is consistent with current design only more aesthetically pleasing.
 1 (0%)  
 The new bridge near the Hilton most resembles Bridge A
 1 (0%)  
 Matching EXISTING OLD ARCHAIC designs is NOT progressive
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A captures the classic bridge design of our area with an eye on unique. I like the forward thinking with consideration of the past. Bridge B feels too ordinary and Bridge C smacks of Toledo.
 1 (0%)  
 Again same explaination as above. With the added comment that the design A and B are nearly an exact copy of the current bridge design as seen from the bridge level. What are the people getting for a nearly $700 million in cost?
 2 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A keeps the feel of the original design with an updated look.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C could never be called imitative.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B certainly reflects new ideas by offering two bridges. Bridge C is innovative.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B does not provide a new look to bridge, the arches on Bridge C do not match.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C looks has no similar form.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is too bland to consider.
 1 (0%)  
 See comments on Question A.
 1 (0%)  
 See Comments for Question A
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is imitative. Bridge B is only functional, it did not pay any attention to from or detail. Bridge C clearly paid the most attention to form and detail and is definitely not imitative. The one thing consistent about Cleveland bridges is that they are historically different. Bridges C Wins!!
 1 (0%)  
 Same comment as above, I believe Bridge A fits with other designs in cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges B and C are boring an old looking. Cleveland needs a new look and this bridge A does not take away any appeal from the existing structures
 1 (0%)  
 The design is extremely detailed.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C incorporates Cleveland's rich architectural history while also looking forward; Bridges A and B are simply pastiches of past bridges, not evolutions derived thereof.
 1 (0%)  
 A is modern yet it still fits. B again is boring. C is too modern and does not fit the existing bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 Again Bridge A is providing us with the same look and feel of our existing bridges and architecure. The other two bridge design, are ok, but do not feel they support the historic architecture of the other bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 All of our Bridges are pretty simple. I feel that we should have a bridge that people will come to see! If we could add a special arch or lights or pillars onto Bridge design A it would be even better.
 1 (0%)  
 I like how it looks. It is similer to the other existing bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A maintanes the themes of the existing bridges . Bridge B and C do not tie in the existing bridge themes at all
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A seems to blend in with innovative design, Bridge B doesn't seen to have a design - period...reminds me of the Plain Jane bridges on the Turnpike.
 1 (0%)  
 See comments in A.
 1 (0%)  
 Need a few more views to fully evaluate. Design B just seems to simple, no class.
 1 (0%)  
 The other bridges are basic Interstate common designs. Bridge C's arches make it unique and give it visual interest.
 1 (0%)  
 Striking bridge
 1 (0%)  
 same as above.
 1 (0%)  
 A is the bridge choice
 1 (0%)  
 BRIDGE "A" HAS THE MOST DISTINCTIVE DESIGN AND REFLECTS THE DESIGN THEME OF THE OTHER BRIDGES IN THE VALLEY.
 1 (0%)  
 Love this bridge...It looks like it just fits!!
 1 (0%)  
 since this will be a great structural design for the city, you don't want it to be a typical bridge. You want it to blend it while still having a great presence, which I believe it does possess.
 1 (0%)  
 Again I feel that bridge b is just a knock-off, similar to all bridges. Bridge A reminds me some of the bridges around Cleveland but is unique for it's location, and Bridge C fits well while being a little different from the bridges around Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is doubtlessly the best option. The steel design on the underside of the deck is beautiful (especially when lit). As for bridge C, I am wondering why the large section of the bridge was designed with so little taste leaving the small section to stick out like a pink-striped zebra. Bridge B falls short of all of my standards.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has the oldtime theme but with a little edge.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is superior in its' design to some of the others like 480 but I feel its' THE choice for Cleveland now.
 1 (0%)  
 I love the idea of the blue lighting at night because will look good with the detroit superior bridge so it will merge nicely with the structures that are unique to Cleveland. I think it will blend nicely with the city.
 1 (0%)  
 Our city is steel but looking to the future. The bridge should be strong and solid looking. It will compliment the other bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is unique and reflective. Bridge B has similiarities to the I-480 bridge over the Cuyahoga River valley. Bridge C brings to mind the Metroparks bridges along Canal Rd., which are out of character in the structures in the valley.
 1 (0%)  
 Knowing the area, this bridge is best
 1 (0%)  
 While C's design is the least that lends itself to the overall typical theme of its predecessors it accomplishes somthing much more important, that is standingout without looking out of place. Should someone look to find the new structure in the Cleveland Skyline they would be able to do so easily but not with a since of profound obviousness.
 1 (0%)  
 the bridge looks very strong and beautiful, unlike B and C
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A would be a great addition to the bridge lighting displays existing in the valley. Bridge C is a completely new strategy with the above structure, however the abutments are architecturally pleasing.
 1 (0%)  
 Very detailed the design catches your eye ...nice look
 1 (0%)  
 It coincides beautifully with other bridges in the city, but maintains a youthful appeal!
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A meets
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges B and C are just regular looking bridges but A compliments the scenery of the buildings without looking same ole same ole...where A shows a glimpse into the future without looking out of place.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A brings great attention throught design to capsture an eye.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is nice, but the design is common, I've seen it used several times in the recent years and definitely would stand out against the existing bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 The arches on c look foolish and unwarranted
 1 (0%)  
 This bridge matches very well with the designs of the Detroit/Superior bridge (the blue lighting and arching details) as well as the spanning of the shoreway.
 1 (0%)  
 r|Reflecting what has come before should not be a significant criteria. This bridge is a gateway to the city and should be a stunning tribute and entry to a vibrant city.
 1 (0%)  
 These all appear to be standard highway bridges with a little extra "flair" thrown in to appease the public.
 1 (0%)  
 Start of bridge matches many overpass bridges today
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B it TOO imitative
 1 (0%)  
 Love the cables on Bridge C
 1 (0%)  
 The designs in no way reflect the beauty or history of the Hope Memorial, Veterans or Main Ave. Bridges. The only bridge it reflects is the ugly inner belt bridge it is replacing.
 1 (0%)  
 We know the bridges by their architecture. Adding some thing new would be good.
 1 (0%)  
 A's lights refelect the other bridge and adds a modern tone. B is just boaring. C doesn't work with any bridge around here, it's not for my city.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A at least has a steel theme, like some area bridges. The other two are awful.
 1 (0%)  
 The main traffic bridges are all similar in design. If that is the criteria, then these three also follow suit. If the criteria would be the smaller, more appealling bridges downtown in the Flats, then really none of these are a fit reflection.
 1 (0%)  
 Simplicity to me says it all. It doesn't overwhelm and fits right in with everything.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C tie's in with the other bridges where the steel is overhead.
 1 (0%)  
 See prior comment which is essentially right on point.
 1 (0%)  
 Consistent with the overall structure and design of other bridges in the area, but unique with the introduction of the "arch."
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C provides all of the above
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A matches the other bridges, Bridge B is okay and Bridge C has no other bridge similar to it around the Cuyahoga county
 1 (0%)  
 Once again, Bridge A exceeds the criteria for queston B. It blends well with the existing bridges in the valley while adding a new liveliness to the bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 A comes closest to reflecting an existing structure, the Detroit-Superior bridge in some elements and the Lorain-Carnegie bridge in others. The arches on C appear to be an afterthought on an otherwise pedestrian design. B, though showing clean lines, is in no way inspiring.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C appears to have a similar design theme to other area bridges through much of the span, however the arching cable suspension bridge does a spectacular job of setting itself off from the others as well.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A reflects the design theme of existing bridges without being an exact copy. B and C do not.
 1 (0%)  
 The bridge design does reflect existing bridges while it provides a new design that is aesthetically pleasing and adds to the skyline of the City.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B seems very imitative to others in the area.
 1 (0%)  
 C: Has elements of both the steel arch and cables of other bridges in the flats. Only one section has structure above road, so it will not be overpowering to the other bridges in the area.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C has similar characteristics to other bridges in the valley but shows an evolution in design.
 1 (0%)  
 Again that old school suppression but in a modern look.
 1 (0%)  
 Superior Viaduct and Hope Memorial bridges are architectural and historical gems and are sources of pride for Cleveland. Conventional highway bridge designs like the three depicted have no consistency or relationship to these bridges, nor to the surrounding valley and architecture.
 1 (0%)  
 I just really like Bridge A better!
 1 (0%)  
 I feel A&B are too close to the existing bridge with not enough new details. Bridge C leaves some of the old ideas with exciting new ideas also.
 1 (0%)  
 It allows open vision to Progressive Field and other downtown structures.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A reflects the design of other bridges in the valley but with a more modern approach
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C both brings something new to the city's architecture, it also looks like other bridges in the area from below.
 1 (0%)  
 there is a suspension bridge in the valley and it is a great focal point of that area. would be great to have that type of bridge closer to the city
 1 (0%)  
 Again, a bridge is a bridge is a bridge. How about imitating the best existing cost-effective bridge?
 1 (0%)  
 It appears that bridge C uses steel beams on the main spans over the valley. There are many bridges throughout the valley also using the similar construction method.
 1 (0%)  
 For the amount of money being invested, do we simply want this structure to blend in? or become a contributing factor to the great skyline we already have.
 1 (0%)  
 I thinks it's unique but consistent in designs to existing bridges. Love the photo of bridge at night.
 1 (0%)  
 Great design
 1 (0%)  
 I feel this bridge will compliment the Lorain Carnegie bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A reflects the city's rich industrial history with bold lines and strong support that was a part of that history.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C gives Cleveland the "modern edge" it needs
 1 (0%)  
 I think brdige A as nice as the "Y" steel under is impressive the rest is plan. Design C is unique and I think will make Cleveland A more photographed and recognized city. Again Design B, boring
 1 (0%)  
 Again A & B are bridges. Relative to other bridges in the area C compliments them.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is really the best.
 1 (0%)  
 Both A and B are somwhat similar to other bridges. Most notably I-480.
 1 (0%)  
 I strongly disagree with this sentiment. This is an opportunity for Cleveland to have a functional and monumental bridge. None of these concepts propose anything that is unique to Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 B and C are pathetic. They lack any imagination. The faux-arch on C is a joke. Don't stick on something and try to pass it off as an architectural element. B is nothing but a ruler on pylons. Bridge A reveals understated girders which echo the bridges of yesteryear without the bulk. They are gracefulas well as structural.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C really stands out. Bridges A and B are very similar.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A, at night will look nice at night dued the lighting, but Bridge C with the proper lighting, will stand out and reflect Spirit of the City. Excellent for a background Photos, Can easy become one of the Cities Landmarks.
 1 (0%)  
 In this area design A excels; it is very consistent with the themes of the existing bridges. It is similar in form and detail, but not imitative; B is OK, but does lacks the form and detail. Bridge C just fails on all accounts. It is almost an eye-sore, vs an attractive piece of art or architecture.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is like a reverse valley and provides interest to Clevelander's and visitor. I believe the bridge could define that part of Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 The Detroit/Superior bridge is a little overwhelming and cannot be seen while entering the city. Bridge C is much more simpler looking and more in-line with contemporary bridges in other cities.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A creates a sense of strength and support reflective of superior design and construction
 1 (0%)  
 It meshes well with the architectural design of the current bridges, yet has it's own unique design.
 1 (0%)  
 It looks wonderful next to the detroit superior bridge
 1 (0%)  
 They are all entirely imitative--bland, boring, unadventurous.
 1 (0%)  
 The typical continuous steel girder design of the straight bridge spans look pretty similar to a standard ODOT bridge with modern fresh spin.
 1 (0%)  
 The light options of bridge A will allow the city to stand out for certain occasions
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A and B are quite similar to the current skyline, where as C is quite unique.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is perfect fit for the valley. Bridges B & C do not take the valley and adjacent structures into consideration. They look more like the 480 and 490 bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 They look like cookie cutter designs designed for being cheap instead of meeting the criteria.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A firs Cleveland design, Bridge B is very Texas style, and Bridge C is similar to Florida and Southern states.
 1 (0%)  
 Once again the bridge should not be bland but innovative and reflect the city's past and other bridges and have uniqueness.
 1 (0%)  
 I am a former Ironworker fron Local #3 in Pittsburgh and now a Professional Engineer in PA and NV and I would love to be a part of this unique structure
 1 (0%)  
 There are some other bridges in that area that have a art deco desing and Bridge A would complement that look without being to historic.
 1 (0%)  
 These are dull and unimaginative designs. Thes designs look like slightly modified highway overpass bridges found all across the USA. These 3 dull designs look like the thousands of other highway overpasses in the US - These designs look like they could come from an overpass in Montana or Nevada or Mississippis or Delaware or Arkansas or any other place since there is style to these designs. There is "no design in these designs"; just elongated highway overpasses. Depressingly dull designs which will haunt the entryway to downtown Cleveland for the next 50 years
 1 (0%)  
 Again, Bridge B is plain where in this area I believe Bridge C has inovative and modern designs to accompany its historical look.
 1 (0%)  
 Consistent design themes, did you see bridge c?
 1 (0%)  
 See above.
 1 (0%)  
 You nailed this one. It looks exactly like the I-480 bridge which is a ugly disaster! Congrats!
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A blends best with elements of old and new design features.
 1 (0%)  
 The design theme would pair well with existing bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge c is the best
 1 (0%)  
 A & B are purely imitative of insipid bridges we currently have.
 1 (0%)  
 same as above
 1 (0%)  
 Again, look at the other bridges, particularly some of the smaller ones spanning the cuyahoga over the flats. We are a city of bridges, and having one as a definitive focal point would only enhance the beauty of the city.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge design A has some elements that match others bridges, but not many. Bridge B is bland and Bridge C while interesting for the design on one end is very bland for the rest of the birdge, only a short section would have the arch visiable.
 1 (0%)  
 As explained above. A involves earlier designs into its theme. But does not draw away from previous ideas. B & C detract from the area and the "Industrial" theme.
 1 (0%)  
 Similar response to question A. Bridge A is the only concept that uses steel as its visual basis of design which is found in most of the other iconic bridges of the area; lift bridges, swing bridges, etc..
 1 (0%)  
 I think it adds to the landscape of the city.
 1 (0%)  
 B & C provide no linkage whatever other than to the Cuyahoga Valley bridge, which is non-descript.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is a new interesting type of structure but may be too modern for it's location.
 1 (0%)  
 I do not notice any consistent design theme of existing bridges in the valley, except perhaps for their ordinary-ness, which all 3 of these designs clearly reflect.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is perfect example of adding style but not being imitative. Bridge B is very dull. Bridge C is unsymmetrical and takes away from the city's skyline.
 1 (0%)  
 While different, this design is extremely pleasing to the eye.
 1 (0%)  
 the look of the bridge is different and appealing
 1 (0%)  
 it reflects the values of Ohioans and fits the simplicity and sportsmanlike of Norteast Ohio
 1 (0%)  
 The pier shapes and clean steel lines match the surrounding bridges for Option C. Bridge B is plain Jane, forgettable. Bridge A looks OK for main spans, but the approaches are also forgettable.
 1 (0%)  
 Again, Bridge A reflects a common theme that speaks "Cleveland" as a vibrant, growing city with a long historical and lively past and a future to which to look forward. I do not get the same feeling from the other two models.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C reminds me of the Leonard P Zakim Bunker Hill Bridge in Boston. I do not like the cable design of either of these. They are not pleasing to the eye and appear to take up more of the surrounding landscape.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A shows no consistency with previous designs Bridge B shows consistency with previous designs but no imagination Bridge C shows both consistency in design and an attempt to diversify the look of Cleveland
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A provides a unique, modern design for the entire structure while Bridge B and 95% of Bridge C are drab, boring old style design.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C not only compliments the existing bridges in Cleveland, it clearly adds a new and exciting theme for future bridges
 1 (0%)  
 If you mean' do they look like a bridge...? then yes, they do.
 1 (0%)  
 These bridges share nothing aesthetically with the current bridges of Downtown Cleveland. They could be built anywhere. They are each unremarkable and do not come close to representing the decades of travel back and forth from east to west.
 1 (0%)  
 Look at existing bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has the cleanest look and brings the city into the 21st century. Bridge C too closely resembles the bridges in Boston.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C somehow loses touch with a consistent design theme as it suddenly reaches for the sky.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge A looks like all the others in the valley. Looks like it could rust away like all the others. bridge B is jut too modern looking for Cleveland. bridge C looks like a new beginning for Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 On bridge C, ground to bridge supports are consistent with existing bridges yet provide large unobstructed vistas below the structure. The arches provide both form and function and aesthetic value not found in the others.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C been there done that.
 1 (0%)  
 none of the designs come anywhere close to replicating the bridges in the valley, meaning the flats areas.
 1 (0%)  
 See "A" above
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge c is the only one that isn't trying to hard to replace the old innerbelt. I think the suspension cables will add a new piece of architecture rather than try to rebuild it without structural steel and way cheeper
 1 (0%)  
 "A" fits compliments other surrounding bridges
 1 (0%)  
 what design???? all I see is span; straight, non descript nothing.
 1 (0%)  
 I can't see the connection to the past and no invitation to the possibilities for Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A & B are just utilitarian. They have no flair in design of the bridge components - just a couple of small curves around the supports. Bridge C at least accentuates the supports with some superstructure.
 1 (0%)  
 A and C have more unique exteriors.
 1 (0%)  
 The concrete arches of Design A compliment the concrete arch on the Detroit Superior Bridge. Bridge C is out of place. Bridge B is too plain.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A looks like it belongs there.
 1 (0%)  
 Same response as above
 1 (0%)  
 I see the similarity to the Cleveland Zoo bridge and bridge A, yet with the modernization of material, design and lighting.
 1 (0%)  
 If duplicating standard, steel-beamed, concrete foundation over pass structures was the objective... then kudos to the design teams. I really don't see much visually that takes from some of the more appealing bridge in the area; a few bits at most. Sadly, we needed a single, signature bridge -- and you are not delivering that.
 1 (0%)  
 Same as above. Although bridge B reflects more of what the present Innerbelt bridge resembles, I have always thought this bridge was never aesthetically appealing. It was just a concrete ribbon from the west side to the east side.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has the design that blends in best with the other bridges in the area, including the look at night with its lighting
 1 (0%)  
 see answer #1
 1 (0%)  
 B reminds me of the Valley View bridge. C still looks like tennis racquets.
 1 (0%)  
 The bridge design is very ordinary...
 1 (0%)  
 The notable bridges of the valley include pylons, large arches, lift structures or massive trusses. Aside from the small arch of Design C, I do not see any relation to existing bridges
 1 (0%)  
 There is no consistency between these bridge designs and what is seen in the Detroit-Superior or Lorain-Carnegie Bridges, which are both far more interesting and superior to these three proposals.
 1 (0%)  
 The bridges in the valley are all unique e.g. cantilevered deck truss, vertical lift bridges, single leaf bascule lift bridge, swing bridge, steel girder, steel arch truss... The new bridge should be just as unique.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A makes some connection to bridges across the valley...the zoo brodge and the Detroit Superior bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Same as above!
 1 (0%)  
 C does not meet the criteria, A exceeds the criteria.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B looks like any other bridge anywhere in the world. The other two at least look interesting.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A reflects the consistent arch theme of the structures in the valley but doesn't imitate any of them.
 1 (0%)  
 I just like bridge A the best.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has the same under deck arch look and feel to it as the surrounding structures.
 1 (0%)  
 These bridge options are so bland that it is a slap in the face.
 1 (0%)  
 BRIDGE A IS NOT IMITATIVE BUT IS CONSISTENT IN THE THEME NEEDED IN THE VLLEY
 1 (0%)  
 compare to lorain carnegie bridge and detroit superior, or even the new bridge over the cleveland zoo, not to mention bridges in the flats.
 1 (0%)  
 It is not at all clear why the designs should look like the other bridges. Why not innovate instead of copy?
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A's design reflects a consistent design theme with the existing bridges in the valley with attention to form and detail without being imitative. Bridge B tends to be too imitative of the existing bridge designs. Bridge C is the least consistent with the design themes of the existing bridges in the valley
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A seems to be consistent with what is going on with other bridges in the area. The other two designs seem too plain and do not draw the attention that Bridge A displays.
 1 (0%)  
 they blend in better
 1 (0%)  
 Step Up ODOT, loose the What About Me attitudes and do what is right for the people you are supposed to be serving.
 1 (0%)  
 Cleveland has several beautiful bridges by the river, and Bridge A, in my opinion, would lend to the look and feel that Cleveland's bridges bring to the city. The other two are consistent with the bridges I've seen in the suburbs, and won't lend any character to the downtown scene.
 1 (0%)  
 Most of the bridges in the area have the underlying arch, the consistant factor while B is too plain and C too modern.
 1 (0%)  
 This particular question is comparative to all other questions in the particular on-going form of consistant prior designs. Bridge C is a bold design reflecting expansion, while maintaining the integrity of the valley.
 1 (0%)  
 B and C are too "lightweight" looking. Cleveland needs massive, industrial age type design to maintain its image of a newage "Gotham City".
 1 (0%)  
 I have traveled all over the us. We need more to show off,
 1 (0%)  
 "B" is utilitarian and easily the least costly of the 3. "C" is a bad immitation of Toledo's bridge(one that is under constant work-even today,years after completion)
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge c is closer in design to the W 25th st. bridge and would compliment the look
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is terrible. It lacks any innovation whatsoever. Bridge B has nice above-grade design elements. However, that cable-stay portion is only a small part of the very large bridge. Bridge A would look best when viewed from the valley. The trouble, though, is that cars travel above it.
 1 (0%)  
Total: 491

7. C. The new bridge should advance architecture and technology of our time, not be nostalgic.

How well does each design reflect the above criteria?

  
Does not meet Criteria
Meets Criteria
Exceeds Criteria
(%)1813191633
Bridge A
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
 12345
(%)49262041
Bridge B
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
 12345
(%)2112161339
Bridge C
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
12345
Total: 1351

8. Please provide further explanation or comments regarding your selections for Question C

 I believe we should move forward and go with Bridge C and its sweeping support structure.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C excedes the others in this area
 1 (0%)  
 If A and C were combine, I would say that it would be unique.
 1 (0%)  
 See previous comments
 1 (0%)  
 As I said, plan A does fit the flow of previous bridges, however looks advanced enough for the 21st century.
 1 (0%)  
 Brige B is a boring old bridge. A looks nice, would make our city look more modern, and everything that we as a city need. bridge c again is in close second place but Bridge A takes the cake.
 1 (0%)  
 I'm not sure I agree with that statement.  Nostalgic is good and Cleveland is the quintisential nostalgic city.  However, I think you can mix the architectures successfully and Bridge C does that the best.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C has that look.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C and the new innerbelt would definitely be a foot in our new direction. A pleasing bridge for a pleasing city. A bridge that would be totally identifiable with Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is 'near' meeting the above criteria.  Bridge B is in the middle, and Bridge C is far from nostalgic given its simplicity and futuristic appearance.
 1 (0%)  
 Very stylish and definately makes a statemnt - bridge C
 1 (0%)  
 The suspension cables of Bridge C reflects our technology, but overall Bridge C is more advanced. Bridge B does not reflect our technology or time.
 1 (0%)  
 bland. if you want to advance architecture. there is nothing green about the designs and nothing that makes these bridges architectural.
 1 (0%)  
 The Cleveland skyline needs a dramatic, vertical statement. These all fade in without making an impact.
 1 (0%)  
 It is architectually pleasy to the eye,
 1 (0%)  
 The design for bridge A would bring an enormous amount of tourists to cleveland. Since it is the most traveled bridge in Cleveland I definately believe that people from all over would come to see this bridge. Bridge A is a fabulous design. Very beautiful too. I would have to say Bridge A 100%!!!
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has a great look and would highlight our city.
 1 (0%)  
 None of the bridges appear nostalgic. Bridge A makes some effort to advancing bridge technology. Bridges B and C appear to bring no advancement to architecture or technology. Their beams look run-of-the-mill and resemble low-cost beams of any boring bridge overpass.
 1 (0%)  
 I like the modern aspect of Bridge A. Bridge C is flashy but I feel it would block the view of downtown upon arrival. Bridge A seems to be the most suitable for enhancing the city skyline.
 1 (0%)  
 These bridges look like they came out of a 1950 pamphlet of the future.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is too simplistic - nothing much to look at.  Bridge C is nice, but it's almost too futuritic and it reminds me of bridges seen in other cities.  Bridge A matches Cleveland, looks fresh and has architectural details that separate it from our bridges of the past.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A and C have innovative looks that present Cleveland in a positive way as we head into the future.
 1 (0%)  
 There is NOTHING in any of the alternatives that reflects architecture and/or technology of ou times.  These are just replicas of what has been done for 45 years.  At least Alt B is a nice, clean, simple design.
 1 (0%)  
 Desigen A is sleek and modern.
 1 (0%)  
 I'm not sure Bridge B advances anything ... it looks like a 1970s era freeway bridge. Though I do reject the idea that the bridge should not be nostalgic ... why not? What is wrong with drawing inspiration in the past, and perhaps even reflecting those influences to give comfort and familiarity to a structure that will actually be quite critical? And given the public's unease about bridge safety in this age of bridge failures and rotting infrastructure, why not adopt a design that conveys confidence and tradition?
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C gets 100% on this!  Nicely done!
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C a little more advanced but not too advanced.
 1 (0%)  
 Again no question, C is the only one that looks sort of modern, except something needs to be added, ie millenium pedestrion bridge in london, what i mean is it nees some cabling or steel to bring it together, otherwise its a mistake.
 1 (0%)  
 Nothing new here.
 1 (0%)  
 Make it different and unique to match our right heritage with a look to the future and a new renaissance!!
 1 (0%)  
 Any way to combine the open truss design of A with the arching cables of C to make the bridge more 3 dimensional on our skyline?
 1 (0%)  
 B is a little to plain, but it looks very functional.
 1 (0%)  
 See above comments.
 1 (0%)  
 A and C were apparently as good as the limitations imposed on the designers (no cable stays) could get. B looks worse than the old, existing bridges....
 1 (0%)  
 I think the bridge should be self heated, this would cut down on accidents in the snow, and eliminate the need for salt, which would add to the deterioration of the bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 While the arched design of bridge A reflects the design of the current bridge and others nearby, it looks new and not old-fashioned.
 1 (0%)  
 A and B do nothing to advance the architecture of Cleveland. B is arguably nostalgic, since the under-deck arches are similar to other bridges on the area and have a slight retro look. The arches of C I think do the best job advancing the architecture of the area.
 1 (0%)  
 Design B, since it has fewer pillars than the other designs, may be the most advanced architecturally. Design A is hulking and overwhelming underneath the deck, while Design C is a standard steel beam bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Clean
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A and C both provide advances in the architecture of the city, while Bridge B only repeats older designs.
 1 (0%)  
 As I mentioned in question B, this new bridge matches the industrial beauty that is Cleveland however it does not look so antiquated as to be Cleveland's past as opposed to illustrating the sheer reverence of Cleveland past architectural beauty.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A -- Similar to the Veteran's Memorial Bridge, nothing too advanced Bridge B -- Not advanced at all! Looks like any other highway bridge that you find on I-480 to the Jennings Freeway, or the new Rooute 8 bridge to take you to I-271. Its blah! Bridge C-- Highlights the future design of bridges. Our neighboring city, Toledo already beat us with their bridge design a couple of years ago!
 1 (0%)  
 I love bridge A but being honest with myself, there is a bit of a nostalgic factor. bridge C would fit this criteria just as well. not impressed with bridge B at all.
 1 (0%)  
 The architeture of bridge A looks great. The design of the steel beams shows class and will bring tourist to Cleveland to see a well built and designed bridge
 1 (0%)  
 Every design fails to effectively portray the architecture and technology of our design; unless the 'deep recession, lacking substance' look is what you are going for. Where is the bike path?
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C has a fresh appearance, not what Cleveland is. We need fresh designs to make Cleveland stand out, not look the same as it always has.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C certainly succeeds in advancing architecture and improved design. The other two are flatly boring in concept.
 1 (0%)  
 A & B are nothing special. C is special.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B look very old and plain, while the other two are both a more modern look.
 1 (0%)  
 The delta-girders are beautiful, light and modern.
 1 (0%)  
 Designs A & C will certainly advance the architecture and technology. Unfortunately, when I look at Bridge B, it seems to remind me of some old pictures from the 50s and 60s when the highway system was just being built! Talk about nostalgic!
 1 (0%)  
 Again, how do the B and C bridges' 1970s style concrete slab piers and spans evoke modern technology and architecture? These two bridges are exactly what Cleveland does not need or want.
 1 (0%)  
 None of the bridges are nostalgic. Perhaps the most old fashioned is B.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B are a dime a dozen Bridge C they have one like that in Detroit MI.
 1 (0%)  
 Ha! Even the unique cable design of one section of Bridge C does not advance either architecture or technology -- cable bridges are old, and the only cable section appears to be on the section over another roadway, hardly a technical challenge.
 1 (0%)  
 Suspension structures exhibit use of modern technology.
 1 (0%)  
 I really wish that any of these three bridges had a type of structure ABOVE the entire length of the bridge (i.e. Toledo's cable bridge). Bridge A is, at the very least, not as boring as the other two.
 1 (0%)  
 C tries to do this with the arch but it looks like a "bolt on" feature to take away from the blandness
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is boring. I can't overstate that enough. Bridge A is not an incredible advancement. It is more a 21st century update on a classic bridge. It is more of an evolutionary bridge than a revolutionary bridge. Bridge C seems the most inventive.
 1 (0%)  
 None of the bridges include bike lanes, so keeping up with the times have been missed by all three. I am not a "green nut", but most bridges nowadays always include bike lanes/sidewalk. I lived in NY prior to moving here 2 months ago and all new bridges and most built within the last 20 years have included some walkway/bikeway.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A: is definitely an upgrade but still presents itself too simple. Bridge B: is reminiscent of all bridges in the area without being innovative. Bridge C: is definitely innovative without being nostalgic.
 1 (0%)  
 it's stunning B is ugly and just like all the other disgusting bridges C tried, but is not consistent with the design
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is the only innovative and bold design in the competition. The other two designs are somewhat to very stale and reflect the drab, current design of the existing innerbelt bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 We need a design that will say BAM Cleveland is back and new not old and tired.
 1 (0%)  
 As Previously mentioned Bridge B has a very nostalgic look
 1 (0%)  
 I see no architectural advance in any of the designs - in fact I think this is a opportunity for Cleveland to add to our rich bridge history and these designs as a disservice.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge a is modern while at the same time providing beauty to it's design.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C with the cables over a road is a a disaster waiting to happen... think of the ice in Toledo! While the design in that area screams new, I think cost cost cost
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A & B do not reflect the advances in bridge design made since WWII. Bridge C does. We traveled on the Rhine, Main, and Danube rivers last summer, and were struck by all the beautiful newer bridges. Same in London over the Thames. Cleveland does not need to be looking backward!
 1 (0%)  
 None of the designs, ESPECIALLY bridge b (and c outside of the arch) are modern and/or exciting. Boring.
 1 (0%)  
 Again C and A win this round. C uses a neat design to stand out and even A puts a new twist on an existing design. Unfortunately B doesn't stand out much in any of these categories. If we were replacing both east and west traffic, like the first image of B suggests, then it would be better.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is nostalgia for the interstate. 55 year old design; same with A. Bridge C reminds me of all the futuristic construction that's been going on in Europe for 20 years, along with that in some other US cities.
 1 (0%)  
 Hard to tell from the renderings. the tow path bridge in Valeey View speaks more to industry, its surroundings, and architecture more than any of these three. I don't see the architecture of cleveland represented in these. Architecture is about history as well as the future.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is like bridges in the chicago area . Bridges B & C do not match the feel of the city
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C slightly exceeds this criteria but by the same token, is an overused design in dozens of cities throughout the US. Whereas Bridge A, although reminiscent of days passed, has some exciting new elements that are more modern and clean; such as the lighting and open truss.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge B is just boring. The Open Triangular supports of A and the Arched cable stays of C show an advanced look in bridge design
 1 (0%)  
 It is a brige that will connect Cleveland from the past to the future.
 1 (0%)  
 same as previous.
 1 (0%)  
 YES
 1 (0%)  
 None of them look retro
 1 (0%)  
 Again, Brdige B just looks like every other bridge we've all seen and does not 'stand out' as this new major innerbelt bridge should (in my opinion)
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C stands out as a new age bridge compared to the other two, older looking designs
 1 (0%)  
 I think the bridge should be something that stands out in the cleveland community. It should draw national attention as well as great architectual design. It can be something that will attract people to our great city of cleveland. I think though that the bridge should be a combonation of bridge c and bridge a the design of the large arch in c is an eye catcher but the base leaving out each side is very bland and plain. It shoul incorporate the arching effect of the tressels of bridge a. That would be the most appealing look in my opinion..
 1 (0%)  
 Design 3 is a very exciting and contemporary looking bridge that has a sense of distinction.
 1 (0%)  
 Hard to see how they advance architecture or technology
 1 (0%)  
 LOOKS FUTUREISTIC
 1 (0%)  
 See above. Bridge C is incredibly innovative, while it does not offend current sensibilities.
 1 (0%)  
 A: Architecturally Modern. B: Architecturally 1980's C: Architecturally Futuristic
 1 (0%)  
 I love the design of Bridge A. Especially the night picture when it's all lit up. I think it will enhance the look of downtown Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 new a fresh ideas are fore front in inclusive modern engineering technologies here.
 1 (0%)  
 C is completely different and yet the contemporary feel also feels like can could blend in well. We have a nice mixture of concrete and metal bridges. It's contemporary feel could bring an entirely new look to our skyline. I like it!
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A makes the best use of the lights. It simply gives off an air of progress. Bridge C also meets this criteria but it does so in a manner that seems trite; large suspension bridge would alter the view of the city not necessarily symbolize progression for it.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is definitely more modern looking, but would like to see that reflected on the top of the bridge for driver to see.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is certainly the most contemporary design and in the future will point to a specific period in our city's rich history.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A and C definitely looks advanced and has a great look while Bridge B looks ordinary.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is similar to new architecture seen new at this time.
 1 (0%)  
 The bridge should have a bicycle path
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge c plan seems to be showing two plans for different areas. Is the large arch/ cable the look for the main bridge? That would hit the criteria of this question right on the dot.
 1 (0%)  
 While bridge A does have the arch support concept, this design is neat, clean and provides a very modern look. I have concerns about the lasting (50 years+) quality of the cable support system of bridge C, given the salty climate of Cleveland winters.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has nostalgic features while bridge C has one minor new feature. Bridge B has neither nostalgic nor any advancement of architecture. Combine bridge A and C for the perfect bridge!
 1 (0%)  
 Ultra modern with curving asetics
 1 (0%)  
 Not sure I agree with this statement, and it seems to contradict Question A. Some of the greatest architecture in this city is nostalgic. The Fulton Road bridge, recently rebuilt, mirrored the original bridge. It fits within the architecture of the city and is beautifully redone.
 1 (0%)  
 Very modernistic.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is futuristic, Bridge B a typical interstate bridge and Bridge C has the beautiful arch at Ontario St. yet the rest of Bridge C is a typical design like Bridge B. One note about Bridge C. The cables could be an issue in the winter months, eg: Toledo I-280 bridge has ice build up on the cables which when the temperature rises, the ice would fall off the cables onto the cars below causing damage to vehicles (an afterthought that is making news in Toledo)
 1 (0%)  
 Only Bridge C makes a dramatic statement, & reflects, to a degree, what most of the world's newest bridges show in advancing bridge architecture.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is just a neat looking design and the blue lights underneath carry on the lighting of the bridges in the flats.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A demonstrates technological advancement of the current era and would help promote future technological development and design. It is not a vintage inspired design theme.
 1 (0%)  
 Just as above comment it is a fresh design for Cleveland
 1 (0%)  
 Brideg (a) is a sleek improvement in design without imposing on the landscape
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is the most progressive and imaginative architecturally and technologically.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A just meets the criteria with its modern lines but there are no obvious technological advancements used. Bridge B clearly represents a modern bridge through the use of modern suspension technology. Bridge C looks much like a typical interstate bridge with some modern trappings.
 1 (0%)  
 This city is built on nostalgic. That does not mean we have to live in the past. It also does not mean that we have to try and live in a over dress up world also. Bridge B is the choice of the three.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C defintiley presents a feeling of modern times with the arches. Not nostalgic at all. Bridge A appears to be imitating the old style arhes of the old concrete bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 Brige C is the only one that would advanceto the future the city and impress visitors to our city . (Medical Mart ??) Bridge C is just a nothing piece of architecture. Bridge B the underside is the only interesting architechture
 1 (0%)  
 Modern, modern, modern! Bridge C is the only one which looks to the future.
 1 (0%)  
 ????????
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A appears futuristic and smooth, embodying forward movement with streamlines but sturdy members. The bland design of Bridge B is a step back in time to minimalist concrete design of the 1970's; like the old CSU Student Center, it will soon look obsolete. The smooth arch of Bridge 3 looks modern and high tech, but is too small in scale and only spans one main artery into the city.
 1 (0%)  
 Again, Bridge B is too "plain Jane"; Bridge A is nice, but Bridge C reflects today's architecture and technology more.
 1 (0%)  
 I think Cleveland needs to upgrade its image and move past its rust belt reputation. A new skyline, new designs, and forward thinking architecture will help with branding Cleveland as a place to do global business.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge b is too plain and bridge c looks the same with one arch span -bridge a looks space age and massive-such an impressive structure for cleveland
 1 (0%)  
 Niether A nor B advance anything. They look no different than any of our other bridges as far as standing out for people to remember.
 1 (0%)  
 Although design C has the unique quality of "the cage" the remainder of the bridge appears as boring as any other highway bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 C goes above and beyond in my mind. It is something like a hybrid suspension bridge. Very neat and eye opening when looking at it.
 1 (0%)  
 This is the state of Ohio's largest infrastructure project ever, and this is what we get? I sincerely hope ODOT and the people of Greater Cleveland reject the 3 proposals. If the design teams cannot come up with anything better choose different design teams. Of the 3, Bridge C is reflects technology of our times but they all sorely lack in this aspect. We need something innovative not something that reflects the tired and boring themes/designs of existing bridges in the city.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge a looks like it belongs in the space. bridge b is too slim for the area. it looks like a flyer and would encourage speeders. bridge c is pretty in the night view but i think the archecture is distracting
 1 (0%)  
 The arches have technology written all over it.
 1 (0%)  
 C definitely reflects a growing technology and advancement in architecture, the rest don't.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge "C" has a certain "Jetsons" look to it, showing that Cleveland is/ can be futuristic...
 1 (0%)  
 The arches are fantastic.
 1 (0%)  
 we dont have anything like bridge c in cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is the only bridge that will leave an impression of modern style for citizens and visitors of Cleveland. C is the only bridge that is a step into the future for Cleveland. To me it symbolizes pride and confidence to move forward to better times, as well as it being the only bridge I see here that can be seen as a real landmark to citizens and visitors alike.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A: awesome great modern archiecture with moder techolonology Bridge B: old boring cookie cutter design wake up its 2010 Bridge C w "furturisic design, yet it screams BORING!!!
 1 (0%)  
 The lines of Bridge B are the most nostalgic of the three...very remeniscent of the 50's futuristic look.
 1 (0%)  
 Awesome. Beautiful. Not cluttered or boring.
 1 (0%)  
 A combination of bridge A and C would look really nice. The arches under the bridge in bridge A is very nice and looks similar to the new bridge in Washington D.C, but needs the above arches from bridge C. Similar to the newer bridge in Toledo or off of US50 near Athens, Ohio.
 1 (0%)  
 No, we need to be nostalgic for this bridge. I disagree with this question. I mean, we're a steel city with massive steal bridges. Now we're supposed to ignored all of that? No. It's called 'take a look out the damn window instead of dreaming cool bridge designs'.
 1 (0%)  
 I like nostalga
 1 (0%)  
  This style is a world favorite for the new century.
 1 (0%)  
 Picture C is beautiful I loved it it fits downtown I choose C because it will make downtown Cleveland stand out.
 1 (0%)  
 The new bridge in my eyes needs to be eye catching and should help breathe new air into a city that needs so much for its future
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C looks more modern and less 1960's urban heaviness than the other choices
 1 (0%)  
 Another way to say 'technology of our time' is lowest cost and highest utility. WalMart, Toyota Camrys and plastic shopping bags all reflect the technology of our time - and yes they all have utility but what else do they offer? Sadness is what the technology of out time gives me. Please high court of progress throw out this criteria.
 1 (0%)  
 A meets this rather well. While there is certainly no nostalgia to B and C neither is there much advancement. B's minimalist design might be an advancement somewhere else, but not here.
 1 (0%)  
 I believe A is updated but keeping in theme. C will have a dated look in 20 years because many of the bridges that are being built today look like this. I expect the taste will change and we won't have these suspensions in a few years.
 1 (0%)  
 Every single one of these designs was a rip off. How much did we pay for these designs? Really? I could have come up with a better design using microsoft's paint. All of these designs scream old and seem very uninspired.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges B and C are plain steel girders across the entire valley screaming nostalgia. Bridge a has an advanced architecture.
 1 (0%)  
 C wins this one, love the eye candy! B is till boring and C does have a modern flow to it.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A offers a slightly different take on the modern bridge, but none of them truly advance architecture. Bridge B looks like a typical highway overpass design that has been popular for decades. Bridge C reminds me of the existing CLE airport design and is no way is a new idea.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is clean and forward looking with the distinctive suspension section visible to all. Bridge B is clean but bland. Bridge A just a blast from the never to be repeated past.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A and B seem wedded to the current design more than Bridge C does.
 1 (0%)  
 I suppose that from a structural point of view, they all meet this criteria, but from a visual architectural view, Bridge C outshines the other two.
 1 (0%)  
 "C" is the true winner.
 1 (0%)  
 it is more contemporary than our other bridges. time for Cleveland to become part of the future and a bit less of the past. (olden days)
 1 (0%)  
 It seems question B and question C contradict themselves.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C appears to welcome the visitor with a progessive design. Even if this design is not final, this bridge should be a bold and progressive design, one that will easily be identifiable with the city of Cleveland. This is liie putting a new front door on the house, it should make a forward-thinking statement that will encourage growth and innovation.
 1 (0%)  
 This bridge is a total loser. Looks like it was built by a kid in an Erector.
 1 (0%)  
 A & B are just a bridge with cement to drive on and a wall to block view. C gives a rising structure to autos to feel like we are flying across.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A and Bridge C mave modern touches, but bridge A stands out to meet all the criteria and visual interest that we are looking for.
 1 (0%)  
 I think this is an excellent criteria and none of these bridges advance the architecture of Cleveland. I would love to see a modern bridge that complements what we already have. I just don't see that with these designs.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B tends to border on nostalgic for me. While the open latice work is interesting, it is also a little too similar to other bridge work and therefore is more of the same for me.
 1 (0%)  
 It is possible to mesh futuristic with a hint of nostalgia, which I think any large feature on the Cleveland skyline should strive for. I'd like to see the bridge marry a modern feature like a arch support structure with more nostalgic colors and themes, such as hints of red brick or darker metal, something evocative of the older architecture that still permeates the city's skyline.
 1 (0%)  
 The arches of Bridge C do lend a new element that is nice - but as I said in my previous comment the images are not consistent and hard to understand.
 1 (0%)  
 3 ugly concepts, looks like they were designed by discount bridges inc. or bridgemart or maybe MacBridge. Just butt ugly
 1 (0%)  
 See my previous comments above.
 1 (0%)  
 again a and b do not even come close to advancing bridge architecture.
 1 (0%)  
 Both A and C accomplish this
 1 (0%)  
 Same response as item B above.
 1 (0%)  
 same comment from B. above applies here...so, we shouldn't be nostalgic but keep the history in mind while looking toward the future?....what?!
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A & C both seem to advance architecture. They both seem modern. The arches of bridge c are modern but obstructive of the downtown skyline. Bridge b doesn't inspire any thoughts of advancing technology and architecture
 1 (0%)  
  Possible go with bridge c if the cable span eliminates pillars under the bridge, and only if this elimination creates a benefit to the city and offsets loss of a clear view.
 1 (0%)  
 A and B look like the bridges built in Detroit in the 70's
 1 (0%)  
 Love the lights. Bridge A looks spectacular in day and in night.
 1 (0%)  
 For the most part bridge "B" meets all criteria there may be other designs but are not choices here.
 1 (0%)  
 I dont think any of the proposals break new ground.
 1 (0%)  
 All three are pretty blah. Obviously, the cost containment limited the possibilities. How unfortunate, for we will have to live with the results for a very long time.
 1 (0%)  
 Again A and B are just boring.
 1 (0%)  
 I see no advance designs or technolgy here... Bridge C has an arch. Making a bridge "nostalgic" looking using advanced designs is not a bad thing.
 1 (0%)  
 The open steel arches in Bridge A are original and interesting. The single arch in Bridge B is very interesting, but it only spans a short distance, which keeps it #2 in my mind.
 1 (0%)  
 Combine plan "A" with "C" and you have an architecture and technology.
 1 (0%)  
 I would say this is a bit of a trick question because obviously they ALL reflect advanced architecture and current technology, it is a matter of what is most pleasing visually, and I think bridge A has that covered best.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C has only one element that is even remotely advanced. Unfortunately this one element is in a singular space which already has architecture which promotes the city. Bridge A has a sleek design that is spread along all spans of the bridge, which again, if combined with the cable arch, would be outstanding.
 1 (0%)  
 My main concert is more safety, and Bridge "A"looks like it has shock absorbers where the steel meets the concrete. Our weather is rough, it is by the water, and there is a lot of traffic, especially truck on this bridge. So whatever design is gone with. THIS SHOULD BE PARAMOUNT. Looks is good, but performance and durability is the major reasons we need a new bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 I prefer Bridge C.
 2 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C does match the architecture and the technology of todays time, but it deson't fit with everything coming into cleveland
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C definitely will show case cutting edge design and technology.
 1 (0%)  
 By this time we all know i am a fan of bridge C. This is the most unique and creative proposal that i have seen. This will show cleveland's creative, and artistic side.
 1 (0%)  
 B and C main spans are nostalgic and boring.
 1 (0%)  
 C. Would be seen as the of this era.
 1 (0%)  
 I can't say they look advanced or new technology of our time but are not nostalgic.
 1 (0%)  
 Sometimes too much gives more openings for error, or disaster. Bridge A shows excellent architecture and technology. However, the basic building structure gives less opportunity for the errors and natural disasters.
 1 (0%)  
 The slender and sweeping form of the arch in Bridge C is exactly the type of form that modern cities are striving to convey to urbanites. Look at the Metroparks Towpath Trail bridges in Valley View.
 1 (0%)  
 B and C do not come anywhere close to "advancing architecture and technology." A is only slightly better. All three appear to be like any other pre-fab bridge built in the middle of no where, not on the edge of a major city.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is more interesting
 1 (0%)  
 Are you kidding me! You cannot be serious! Advance architecture & technology of our time? Please explain to me where these three designs accomplish that. This is what the taxpayers of Ohio have to show for the millions of dollars guaranteed to each of the design collaborations just for submitting these designs? Again, what a joke!
 1 (0%)  
 See above
 2 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C should duplicate the arch over the river. Bridge A should incorporate the arched at the Ontario and river spans to minimize number of columns.
 1 (0%)  
 Nothing in these designs is forward thinking.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A and C are modern, though A is the most complete. Other than the arches, C is kind of boring.
 1 (0%)  
 These designs don't advance anthing. They are a cheap attempt to provide a bridge for only transportation. They are not advancing technology, architecture
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C lacks architectural advancement because the main design does not span the cuyahoga river and Bridge B is just boring. Bridge A gives a consistent architectural flow that is from beginning to end.
 1 (0%)  
 It's modern and looks great on the skyline.
 1 (0%)  
 B looks like any freeway bridge built in the past 20 years
 1 (0%)  
 A and C are both different and good. C gives a modern look in particular
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A would help bring our area into the modern times!
 1 (0%)  
 Advance the architecture and technology of our time? You've got to be kidding. None of them come close
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C competes with already outstanding elements of architecture and obstructs the view of it.... Bridge A all the way!
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A and B are too old-fashioned in design and offer no awe-inspiring reaction.
 1 (0%)  
 While I am assuming that all 3 bridge designs will incorporate sustainable ("green") technology, and incorporate all the cool sensor technology that the new I35 bridge received; I think bridge C best shows advancement of the architecture and technology of our time -- long thin lines. But instead of just one set of arches, there should be three; one at each end and one in the middle.
 1 (0%)  
 B & C are just too flat! A has some flair,
 1 (0%)  
 I see in no way how any of the designs advances architecture and technology of our time. Bridge b and c are basically as plain as you could make them, take away the arch in the one, which is small, and there is nothing, they look like freeway bridges built in the 1970's. The bridge a design once again is a step in the right direction, but how abut something up top to give the driver and skyline some character, add arches all the way across, or some big pillars or anything but this bland version. I think the majority of northeast Ohioans will be extremely disappointed if any of the three or combination of these three designs are used. Look to other cities for inspiration and go back to the drawing table. I really am in disbelief that these are the options provided.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge b depends too much on its thin arches above, and would look poor against some of our other bridges. Bridge A meets a those criteria, and then expands on it with solid sleek lines. bridge b, well..looks too minimal.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C meets this criteria but is weird... Bridge B is so much like all other interstate bridges. Bridge A is a bit nostalgic but interesting & pretty.
 1 (0%)  
 It's an "expansive" impression - one that invites all to take a big breath in ... in awe.
 1 (0%)  
 I don't thin Cleveland has a suspension bridge and if we're to move forward, a new design is needed. Time to shake the old image and begin forming a new one.
 1 (0%)  
 While B and C are nice, they don't look very innovative. They look like bridge on and off ramps and do not "advance architecture" If you want something more of our time, look to the new Cleveland Museum of Art or the Cleveland Clinic or future drawings of CSU for inspiration, since those are advancements of architecture for our time. If one had to fit in that criteria, it would be bridge A.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C reflects advance architecture and technology of our time (as much as I would hate to say it). Bridge A is not as much nostalgic as it is in my mind a step ahead in the right direction (for Cleveland). Bridge B is (once again) boring. Sure, putting lights on it is neat, but it is just regurgitated design for the area.
 1 (0%)  
 "C" with its individual arch is an artists expression carried out at the taxpayers' expense. Now is not the time for extravagance.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A and C per the PDF look as though they will be something people can look at and admire, Bridge B looks old fashioned and not that appealing.
 1 (0%)  
 Lacks creativity
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is bland. Bridge C has the most advanced tech with the arch. Bridge A has a elegant frame. I like Bridge C's Arch with Bridge A's aquaduct design.
 1 (0%)  
 A looks pretty futuristic, B looks pretty average, while C really looks futuristic
 1 (0%)  
 I think the lighting on design A reflects the style of architecture that is already in Cleveland. It's modern, but also is a nod to Cleveland's industrial past. I think this is a good thing!
 1 (0%)  
 C is just too "out there". It's futuristic...but not of Cleveland's future.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A and C have some advance architecture and technology. However, Bridge c have some unigue features above the deck for daily communters.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C has a 21st century elegance.
 1 (0%)  
 How does putting nothing on top or a simple arch on one design advance architecture of technology. None of these are viewed as cutting edge
 1 (0%)  
 A is best
 1 (0%)  
 A looks like the use of arch might be somewhat novel though the seemingly low siderails of the deck besides lacking anchoring to the cityscape dont inspire my driving confidence on a windy slipery winter day and look like hey belong along a florida causeway, B and C dont look at all new but i wouldlnt know. C's random use of an cable arch seems arbitrary because of its location along the span and the fact that the arch doesnt seem to communicate with the rest of the bridge
 1 (0%)  
 The Cable stayed arch is very imaginative
 1 (0%)  
 best of the 3 ~ wish it were more dramatic like the new bridge in toledo
 1 (0%)  
 None of the designs is particularly inspiring, or revolutionary, and the cable bridge tries a little too hard to be futuristic
 1 (0%)  
 These designs are so mediocre. How disappointing!
 1 (0%)  
 I don't know if they reflect the advanced technology of our time. They seem to have pretty much the same architecture as any other modern bridge, if that's what's meant by "advance architecture" and they certainly do not reflect the beauty and style of the "nostalgic" bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 C is more advanced
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A might be similar in design to the current bridge but seems to hold up to current design. Bridge B does not appear to have much in the way of character. Bridge C most likely conforms to current design principles but sometimes that might not be a good thing.
 1 (0%)  
 And again, the only reason Bridge C meets the above criteria is the little suspension bridge. The rest is boring.
 1 (0%)  
 I've never seen a bridge like C's rounded top.
 1 (0%)  
 None of the examples push the edge.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B looks like the current piece of shit bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 C is beautiful. It does not look like Cleveland. It looks like a thriving city which Cleveland and Northeast ohio should become in the future.
 1 (0%)  
 None of the designs advance the architecture and technology of our time, but neither are any nostalgic.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is different, only slightly nostalgic. C is no where near being nostalgic.
 1 (0%)  
 architecture and technology seems appropriately done by bridge A evident in the visual beam design, bridge b & c provide a plank to the past.
 1 (0%)  
 I like the idea of 2 seperate bridges for east and west traffic. That is the quality I like in bridge 2.
 1 (0%)  
 This design is beautiful and shows advances in shape and form.
 1 (0%)  
 c makes us look like we are ready for the future
 1 (0%)  
 Design C is the only one of the three that reflects something new. Think in terms of the new I-280 in Toledo -- that is refreshing, modern, something people actually want to look up to see. Bridge designs A and B look like boring, utilitarian knock-offs of the other bridges in the area.
 1 (0%)  
 C looks awesome, and A looks pretty cool. B is boring.
 1 (0%)  
 Neither Bridge A or B reflect any advancement in architecture, since they appear as simple replacement structures. Bridge C makes use of cables in the center, which seems to add strength.
 1 (0%)  
 Suspension bridges are staus quo.
 1 (0%)  
 What is new? Aside from some arches on Bridge C, these all appear similar to the old bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 C is the only one that really stretches into new technology.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is innovative and modern. Bridges A and B are not quite up to par with B and C.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is the only bridge that advances the architectural viewpoint of the valley.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C would offer a new view of the Cleveland skyline and bridge A would look similar but also offer a new element. I feel bridge b is too similar to the current bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is a bridge that doesn't show any advances in technology compared to all the current bridges around town. To advance, this also means that you need to have a new design. Bridge A is too close to the bridge already there. Bridge C shows the advances of the current time with the large arches in the design.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A&B are like the other old bridges. Bridge C looks futuristic so it should have advanced architecture and technology of our time.
 1 (0%)  
 It is time for a modern design to join the venerable family of wonderful Cleveland bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 A and C both look as if they are advanced in architecture and technology, where as B looks dull and common.
 1 (0%)  
 Both Bridges A & C are more unique than Bridge B, which does not inspire a positive reaction in anyone that I have spoken to who have seen the 3 designs.
 1 (0%)  
 BRIDGE A IS BEST DESIGN.
 1 (0%)  
 JUST CAME BACK FROM BOSTON, THE NEW BRIDGE IS AWESOME. TIME TO MOVE CLE FORWARD.
 1 (0%)  
 Ok, now I see where we are going with these questions. Yes, let's be futuristic! There's always a better way, a little healthy competition never hurt anyone. Let's do something nobody has done before.
 1 (0%)  
 There is nothing in any of these designs that will advance the architecture of bridge design. Other than making the members thin, there is little that speaks to the technology available today.
 1 (0%)  
 Architecture should be compatible not stick out like a sore thumb, aka Lewis school at CWRU. Isn't this statement in direct conflict with B & D?
 1 (0%)  
 a & b match (or almost match) the current designs, while c is a departure and a visible advancement. it shows progression and advancement.
 1 (0%)  
 All 3 simply fail this criteria. Of the the 3, I give Bridge A the nod.
 1 (0%)  
 Well have any of you got a clue technology not proven is bunk. Go to Cleveland Stae llok up the sturcutre professor studing cement before you make any decision. To get in contact with him ask one of his students Like tom Hyatt on the new technolgy going on in cement design. The ohio DOT is not qualified to make this decision if they are not up to date on the latest structural engineering improvements.
 1 (0%)  
 Building C and A are advancements.
 1 (0%)  
 Again A and B match 2 current bridges in Cleveland let alone the rest of cuyahoga and therefore would be very nostalgic. While Bridge C may not be true suspension it is a style never before seen in the greater Cleveland area.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge c is the best
 1 (0%)  
 As stated earlier, the first two proposals are much more traditionally constructed. You would see bridges like that everywhere in Northeast Ohio. Bridge C is much more new age with the dramatic arches that give a clean and sophisticated look.
 1 (0%)  
 Old fashioned, lack in contemporary vision.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge c is a poor attempt at looking like a smaller version of similiar bridges in bigger cities.
 1 (0%)  
 The only nostalga here is B and C remind me of the I-490 Bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Once again, Bridge C has the advanced look while B & A both lack.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is the most classic of the styles. The classic style, however, advance the technology and architecture of our time by utilizing environmentally friendly techniques, materials, and ideas. While Bridge B looks futuristic, it reminds me of 1970's predictions about future architecture. Bridge C distracts from Cleveland's skyline and the Gateway district by placing a suspension design in the direct sight-line of Progressive Field. While I would not have been opposed to a suspension style bridge, I find the random placement of a small suspension portion of the bridge unappealing. It appears as an attempt at cutting edge architecture but misses the point that "green" technology and not futuristic looks are cutting edge. In my opinion, a classic design with cutting edge technology and environmentally friendly innovation is the clear way to go.
 1 (0%)  
 I do like the proposed arch on C. But the supprot columns below are very boring.
 1 (0%)  
 The Arches adds to the advance.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A and C are the way to go. Bridge B looks like any other bridge and does not reflect a 21st century city.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B seems outdated. Bridge C is not as architecturally advanced. Bridge A best represents current architectural advances and technology of our time.
 1 (0%)  
 C is reminiscent of a suspension bridge while looking new and innovative at the same time. A isn't quite as 80s and B.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is interesting and aesthetically pleasing on one end. Bridge A is somewhat interesting, Bridge B makes me want to throw up.
 1 (0%)  
 A is an attractive, clean, modern look. B is too basic, lacks personality C intrudes on the skyline, too loud
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A looks advanced and fits in with the cleveland skyline. Bridge B is again i think lacking in any real forward thinking. Bridge C does also push the design edge An would mirror somethink like the bridge in toledo.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is the only bridge that looks advanced in architecture. The other two bridges look basic. We want a bridge here in Cleveland that people will remember and marvel at. I think Bridge C does that.
 1 (0%)  
 Matching EXISTING OLD ARCHAIC designs is NOT progressive
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A captures the classic bridge design feels modern and complementary to our area. I like the forward thinking with consideration of the past. Bridge B feels too nostalgic and Bridge C is too space age.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is too advanced and takes away from the views of Cleveland. It's too distracting. Bridges A & B both have clean lines and complement the views of the city and the current and old architectures.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is by far to most innovative
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges B and C do not advance architecture
 1 (0%)  
 Definitely advanced. Love the design/architecture for our future and for less congestion when traveling the highways.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C definitely best in this catagory.
 1 (0%)  
 See comments on Question A.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A looks modern and looks a step better than B. Bridge C is way too flashy.
 1 (0%)  
 See Comments for Question A
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is the only option that really addresses advancing the areas architecture and technology. Bridge A attempts to mimic the look of others bridges over the valley. Bridge B looks like it belongs over a valley in the middle of nowhere. Bridge C gave me an immediate impression of new and innovative technology. I first viewed the pictures on the local 11 o-clock news, the only one initially stuck out as having a high level of arch&tech was Bridge C, and after further review it is still the best in this regard.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is phenominal. It pushes the envelope.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A looks the most advanced compared to the other two.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C, although gives us an updated contemporary feel, still does not fit the with what else is going on in the city. Bridge B, quite frankly does nothing for me aesthetically. Again, I vote for Bridge A
 1 (0%)  
 I think C has a very strange, futuristic design to it. I like the concept but its not that attractive. something is missing..I really like the sides of Bridge A...that Bridge is attractive.
 1 (0%)  
 It's old but new.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C has the appearance of "High-Tech", but it's on;y for a small chunk of the overall bridge. Bridge A looks good all the way through and good lighting!
 1 (0%)  
 See comments in A.
 1 (0%)  
 There is nothing new under the Sun. Design C does have the Broadway section with a little different feature.
 1 (0%)  
 The graceful arches of Bridge C appear very modern and unlike anything else in Cleveland, yet they also are reflective of the older bridge designs in the area.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A looks to similar to the current bridges and does not make a statement about moving forward or a feel of technology.
 1 (0%)  
 Just a beautiful bridge. Classy!
 1 (0%)  
 l like the design of bridge A
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is the only forward-looking design of the bunch!
 1 (0%)  
 BRIDGE "A" HAS A SLEEK AND MODERN APPEARANCE AND IS THE BEST.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is sleek, yet the arches make it more modern. It will be very recognizable.
 1 (0%)  
 I enjoy the artistry of both A and C, but bridge B is simply dull. It may simply be misrepresented in the PDF, but it doesn't come across as inspiring to future builders.
 1 (0%)  
 I don't like the look of the other bridges, they are missing something.
 1 (0%)  
 I think the design of bridge A is respectful of the architecture in cleveland while being sleek and advancing the technology (with the lighting and underbridge design)
 1 (0%)  
 Nothing wrong with being nostalgic.
 1 (0%)  
 Awesome!
 1 (0%)  
 A, is deffinitly aesthetically pleasing to the eye,but lacks C's overall presence. B is rather plain while very functional. C contains both function and beauty even at an initial glance.
 1 (0%)  
 the bridge (A) has a lot of detail without looking to foo-foo, like (C)
 1 (0%)  
 Both C & A showcase interlacing designs that are structurally complex.
 1 (0%)  
 for sure a future look to it not something from the past
 1 (0%)  
 It just has an overall appeal but doesn't appear to be something you will be able to date with time.
 1 (0%)  
 architecture and technology of our time this says it all about Bridge A
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges B and C look like any other bridge out there where A shows potential into the future, I can imagine a great skyrise building being built to compliment it, B and C don't provide me with inspiration to see that
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A shows great technological architecture at a cheaper price than the other two bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is very boring and does nothing to show where we've come in design. Bridge C is definitely modern but, I worry, will be dated within 5 years. Bridge A seems more timeless. Definitely modern but will still be interesting from years to come.
 1 (0%)  
 Can't see any 'advance' architecture in these concept drawings. they look extraordinarily boring and familiar like any bridge seen in any city.
 1 (0%)  
 These bridges appear to contain no real innovative or current formal moves. The structural programs appear to be humdrum, they are visually dull.
 1 (0%)  
 The arches on bridge C seem to be lost in the overall span.
 1 (0%)  
 None is nostalgic; none is advanced or innovative.
 1 (0%)  
 Cable arch is very unique and modern. All new bridges in Florida are cable.
 1 (0%)  
 The beam design on Bridge A is very nice and looks modern. Bridge B is just too plain. Bridge C looks like an old style bridge with a modern design.
 1 (0%)  
 I see no innovation at all except for a few lighting effects, which of course use energy. If they are green design, there is no note of it that I am able to access.
 1 (0%)  
 At least C looks new. B does not. But the cables are done in other cities. Still like A
 1 (0%)  
 C doesn't fit with most existing Archiecture in the area. B is too plain.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C at least has a small arch in one section to provide some visual interest. The other two look like 1960's designs.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B looks like the 1950's. Bridge C looks incomplete and does nothing but add a fancier exit to downtown. Bridge A does not advance the technology or architecture by much but it does the best.
 1 (0%)  
 Once again simplicity has always been ahea of its time. Form and function at its best.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is just plain ugly. A is nice looking, but C knock it out of the park.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B seems to be from a grade school classroom. I don't believe there is any architecture involved.
 1 (0%)  
 Introduction of the "arch" demonstrates a true advance in architecture for the city of Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C with it cable arch does this
 1 (0%)  
 see above
 1 (0%)  
 B and C, even with the superstructure, look like any other highway bridge anywhere. A is slightly better, but only slightly.
 1 (0%)  
 With the wide variety of bridges in the immediate area, the Bridge C cable span will add to the history and portray the continued enhancement of bridge design bringing a modern day chapter to the history of bridges in Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C's architechture seems advanced, but overly techno.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C gives off a very modern feel from its unique design. It is not a nostalgic bridge but very unique and shows the advancement that architecture and technology are taking in our every day lives. Very appropriate for the space.
 1 (0%)  
 C: Shows the technology. Others are just typical bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 The arch design reflects an advancement in technology.
 1 (0%)  
 Cable stay bridges are cool and seem to be the in style of our time
 1 (0%)  
 I'm not sure why being nostalgic has been automatically eliminated as a deign criteria. Modern is not always best. In fact, the best bridges in Cleveland are historical, and some of the most cutting-edge modern designs incorporate elements using the best of what has been done historically. Rethink this criteria.
 1 (0%)  
 Both A and C seem to incorporate advance Architecture the best.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C appears to have some suspension reflections which would be new and exciting for Cleveland! Bridge A &B seem to be too old school.
 1 (0%)  
 Being close to the lake, it is important from a cost perspective to keep clean lines to avoid weathering rust and corrosion.
 1 (0%)  
 By far bridge A is more aesthetically pleasing. It conforms with older bridges but is a fresher look
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is a very typical bridge, it appears to not be special at all. Bridge C is modern and classic at the same time.
 1 (0%)  
 It looks modern and classy.
 1 (0%)  
 A bridge is a bridge is a bridge. Architecture is for buildings, technology for systems.
 1 (0%)  
 when looking at bridge c, you can clearly see that there is more advanced architecture and technology being used over the other bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 By adding the suspended arch bridge, they appear to have combined both common as well as modern designs.
 1 (0%)  
 The lines are sleek and modern.
 1 (0%)  
  Design B is the best proposal for the new bridge - clean and smooth layout. The other 2 have unnecessary decorative work that is going to be a maintenance problem. Suggestions for bike and pedestrian lanes should be disregarded as inappropriate and costly, but additions in other areas should be considered.
 1 (0%)  
 Very forward thinking in desing
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C has a more retro look.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is a complete blend of new technology and history by beautifully blending into the current structures in the city.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C gives Cleveland the "modern edge" it needs
 1 (0%)  
 Cannot baet the view of this bridge at night. woulod be great for the city of Cleveland
 1 (0%)  
 The long sweeping booms and cabling on bridge C reflect more of an architectural theme and what technology is today.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C doesnt look like anything i have really seen before. Bridges A and B are look very "typical" of many bridges around.
 1 (0%)  
 There is nothing aesthetically innovative about these proposals.
 1 (0%)  
 Advancing architecture and technology would have included bike lanes. B and C are mindless, utilitarian structures designed only to connect two points. Bridge A strives for a space in the visual plane of the city. Its presence will add to the cityscape, not clutter it.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is a beautiful bridge. escpecially the night time rendering. Although you don't get an idea of innovative materials from a rendering.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B, does not reflect the current trend of bridges, it reflects a turn of the century theme. Bridge A reflects a refine precast Bridge, Bridge C Theme is reflects more public accepted use of cable bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 This question cannot adequately be answered due to the fact that little details about the technology used to create the bride is available. I do not think advancing architecture should be a purpose for a bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is interesting all the way. The other bridges look like they are conserving the imagination.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A and B look similar to what we already have. I think Bridge C is a little more progressive in nature, but not overstated.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is state of the art design and construction.
 1 (0%)  
 The cable suspension design is graceful, artistic, and reminds me of a stringed instrument.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge A is the only one that looks like it's advancing people as well as architecture!
 1 (0%)  
 Are you kidding? There is nothing about any of these designs that advances architecture or technology to any appreciable extent.
 1 (0%)  
 This bridge shows the progressiveness of the Cleveland community.
 1 (0%)  
 THE CABLE STAYED IS SOMETHING NOT TYPICALLY SEEN IN THESE PARTS OF THE COUNTRY. A great new look for a city on the rise.
 1 (0%)  
 The girder design and shape of bridge A is truly strides ahead of times
 1 (0%)  
 I think bridges a and b are too much like all the other bridges of the past. Bridge c looks modern and streamlined, like today's technology.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is really the only bridge to advance architecture and not be as nostalgic as A and B.
 1 (0%)  
 All three structures are using current technology. Bridge A is Classy. Bridge B is uninspiring. Bridge C has a nice cable span over Ontario (?) but does not highlight the valley and does not blend with Clevelands Architecture.
 1 (0%)  
 They are cookie cutter designs that do not advance bridge building technology or civil engineering.
 1 (0%)  
 Why do you want to design a bridge to be modern enough to look like a sore thumb sticking out in a City Scape?
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is not a imitation like the other two and is innovative and modern like in Toledo and Boston.
 1 (0%)  
 I think the arches give a distinctive look that will blend in well with the skyline
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is sleek from end to end. Bridge B is dull from end to end. Bridge C is dull but does have a nice flair with the golden arches.
 1 (0%)  
 C is the only bridge of the 3 that could be considered an advancement. The other 2 look like any other bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Design of Bridge A will be new to any bridges I know of in our state
 1 (0%)  
 I like the large variety of bridge types and styles in Cleveland. I like the classic architecture of the old bridges. Bridge C is the signature bridge that Cleveland needs.
 1 (0%)  
 Exciting design.
 1 (0%)  
 Love the look of this bridge. A bridge similar was built in Columbus but only had an arch on 1 side.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has a better look to it then the other two and it appears that Bridge C only has one area that is architecturely interesting as opposed to the entire bridge design.
 1 (0%)  
 These are dull and unimaginative designs. Thes designs look like slightly modified highway overpass bridges found all across the USA. These 3 dull designs look like the thousands of other highway overpasses in the US - These designs look like they could come from an overpass in Montana or Nevada or Mississippis or Delaware or Arkansas or any other place since there is style to these designs. There is little that is unique about these unimaginative designs. There is "no design in these designs"; just elongated highway overpasses. Depressingly dull designs which will haunt the entryway to downtown Cleveland for the next 50 years
 1 (0%)  
 Again, from a qualified architectural point of view, none of the bridges will go down in history as something to behold. Bridge A is the only one that isn't hideous.
 1 (0%)  
 See comments above.
 1 (0%)  
 A & B are definitely do not acheive this directive
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge c.... you call that advanced architecture...yuck!
 1 (0%)  
 Why is this part of the criteria? I would love to see a nostalgic design that better belended with the city around it.
 1 (0%)  
 A looks modern B and C are basically what exists today especially from the valley. C does provide an interesting architectural feature but the rest of the bridge looks like the same tired design
 1 (0%)  
 None of these designs are advanced in anyway compared to the other bridges in the area
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A blends best with elements of old and new design features.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A meets this expectation. B&C are very plain.
 1 (0%)  
 c is the best option
 1 (0%)  
 A & B clearly do not advance anything. C is better but does not seem to advance architecture.
 1 (0%)  
 same as above
 1 (0%)  
 Honestly, I see nothing in the three that speak to any homage to any architectural theme. In particular, option B is offensive as it has zero architectural design. It is purely designed for function, over form.
 1 (0%)  
 All three designs lack imagination -- can't we do better. After all we will live with this bridge for many many years.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B does not meet the criteria and does not advance technology in any way. Bridge C advances too far, at least from an aesthetic standpoint. Bridge A has a good balance between these two qualities.
 1 (0%)  
 Love the steel in A - does the bridge suggest that steel still has a place in the world and Cleveland. I hope so. B&C nothing stimulating from a design perspective.
 1 (0%)  
 I feel the design would fit in well.
 1 (0%)  
 'A' at least has some new features.
 1 (0%)  
 They all have neat characteristics... Bridge A had triangles cut into it. Bridge B had a "Chicago" design to it. But Bridge C exceeds the architecture in all areas!!!!
 1 (0%)  
 I would think that the architecture and technology of our time would reflect environmental green design, turning away from our automobiles to other less destructive methods of transport: trains, bikes, walking etc. By building TWO bridges, in a city where there is less population and one would think, less traffic . . . well, we are advancing the ideas of 1960. Those 1960 freeways also managed to destroy city neighborhoods, and as a resident of Cleveland's Tremont neighborhood, I think this bridge will continue that legacy. As a postscript, I should add that my formost opinion of the whole project is that there should be one bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A combines form and function beautifully. While "C" adds a cable stay bridge on the tail end as some kind of last ditch effort to be unique. "B" does not accomplish anything besides point a to b.
 1 (0%)  
 Very modern and bold looking, without being off the charts.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge design C technology reflects the Uiversity of Akron's Polymer Building architecture and other Northeast Ohio contempory buildings.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has more architectural appeal than the other two designs. Bridges B and C are look like most bridges that can be found around the country that were quickly constructed apparently without much thought to visually pleasing architectural design.
 1 (0%)  
 The Arch Span will set the tone for Cleveland and prvide a Gateway to the city.
 1 (0%)  
 As I said before, Bridge A demonstrates that Cleveland has a bright future ahead of them and A illustrates this quite nicely. Bridges B & C seem to be the same old design that I see across the U.S. I travel quite a bit for business so I view quite a lot of bridges in my journeys!
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A definitely advances architecture and technology Bridge B while it offers a very streamlined looking and sleek bridge deck, really does nothing for the eye in the name of asthetics Bridge C has both a sleek look in the viaduct, and a very contemporary, new look with the arch cable suspended design. Not something that you see every day
 1 (0%)  
 Regardless of the bridge choice, this is going to be a massive project. Out of the three designs, the suspension bridge seems to be the most fitting (choice C). Despite the fact that this design may be the most expensive and involved , I believe this will benefit Cleveland the most in the long run.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is the only design that is imaginative throughout. Bridge B and 95% of Bridge C is a design left over from decades ago.
 1 (0%)  
 I disagree that it should not be nostalgic and believe that bridge C combines both nostalgia with a modern twist
 1 (0%)  
 Again, A is an updated bridge, but still compliments other bridges in existence. B and C are updated, too, but they do not flow with the other bridges in the city.
 1 (0%)  
 Why should the bridge not be nostalgic? I would be thrilled if ODOT said it were going to build a replica of the Brooklyn Bridge. It's a timeless bridge design. How do any of these 'advance architecture and technology? We already have a bridge that looks like two of them, and the third is just an updated version of the bridge we have now that we are replacing.
 1 (0%)  
 OK: none of these bridges is nostalgic. However, it is also true that none of these bridges has a "cutting edge" look; rather, they remind me of the blandly ugly Valley View Bridge on I-480.
 1 (0%)  
 Look at the three designs.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A incorporates a "new" steel design throughout while the others mimic old steel designs although one does add some arches.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge A doesn"t advance architecture design. bridge B looks just like all the bridges in Texas. bridge C is advanced & not nostalgic.
 1 (0%)  
 see questionsA
 1 (0%)  
 Not nostalgic, just timeless
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is a modern segmental technology. Excellent build with few issues down the road. Construction wise B offers the best built bridge with less headaches down the road.
 1 (0%)  
 Again, the bridge designs neither inspire nor present awe for the traveler, etc. just "another" bridge. this is ODOTs duty to build a bridge that contributes to the revitalization of Cleveland. Put us on the map "FINALLY" architecturally and build something right for the city. it is our tax dollars !!!!!!!
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge a is trying to hard to replace the old innerbelt just cheaper looking. Bridge b could be any bridge in the country. Bridge C is Functional like the 490 and 77 bridges. Bridge c has the architecture to be our Innerbelt!
 1 (0%)  
 I feel the design is very modern for our times and would be very impressive to the city of Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 All reflect a straight line getting from point to point.
 1 (0%)  
 Boring--
 1 (0%)  
 I would love a nostalgic looking bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 These are not architecture of our time. They don't even come close. Who chose this criteria and what was the measuing stick???? Look around the world at bridges that are being built for "architecture of our time" ODOT guidance missed the boat!
 1 (0%)  
 A has a flow that is unique
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A hands down, just look.
 1 (0%)  
 Again C would look out of place.
 1 (0%)  
 This bridge reflects a new and modern city.
 1 (0%)  
 I think, just as it is inappropriate for a 80 year old person to dress like a teen, a seasoned city needs a bridge, like Bridge A that is not gaudy and ostentatious, but blends the classic with the modern. I really think Bridge A does a fantastic job!
 1 (0%)  
 Fresh and new would have been wonderful -- if that would have been the result of this input noted above. I don't see anything truly unique, cutting edge, etc..
 1 (0%)  
 I feel Bridge A, although it has a resemblance to the bridges I spoke of before, has a very modern flair. The use of lighting under the bridge reminds me of the lighting used to light those bridges also close to the downtown area. How appealing that was the first time I saw them!
 1 (0%)  
 Only one that looks like it was designed by somebody that wasn't ready for a nap...
 1 (0%)  
 The bridge design does not reflect advancements in architecture, they all take a step backward in time. There is nothing modern or architecturaly stimulating about these designs.
 1 (0%)  
 To the extent economy trumps beauty and utility, and that many new strcutures are bland, they do conform to the standards of our time, unfortunately
 1 (0%)  
 No bridge under consideration here adequately advances the architecture and technology of today.
 1 (0%)  
 represents the best fit for Clevelands skyline!
 1 (0%)  
 If we didn't advance technology over nostalgia, we'd all still be crossing the Cuyahoga in a canoe!
 1 (0%)  
 This bridge goes into the future somewhat for our area. While other states have bridges with cables, we don't, or not too many.
 1 (0%)  
 None of the bridges speak to the future. None will be notable attractions in the city.
 1 (0%)  
 You answered it with the question.
 1 (0%)  
 a and b are same old...same old. Bridge c looks much more progressive and makes a statement that we are moving forward
 1 (0%)  
 The design of Bridge A is unique and represents a new step forward for the City of Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge a looks modern and current, yet still matches the style of older bridges
 1 (0%)  
 How do any of these advance technology? These designs could be made by a child. It is an absolute joke to think that these designs will advance architecture in any way.
 1 (0%)  
 THE ARCHITCTURE AND DESIGN OF BRIDGE A TENDS TO REFLECT MORE NEW TECHNOLOGY THAN BRIDGES B AND C
 1 (0%)  
 These don't advance anything. they are basic standard bridges. Nothing more. I could find duplicates in any state. very forgettable.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A most effectively advances archtecture and technology, without being nostalgic. Bridge B tends to be more nostalgic, while Bridge C tends to disregard the existing bridges in the valley.
 1 (0%)  
 The look of Bridge A catches your eye more than the other two and seems to fit the bill of "advancing architecure and technology of our time"....Bridge C has a nice display near Progressive Field, but is too plain for the spans into the city.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge a and c both have a modern theme with classic design
 1 (0%)  
 These designs are everywhere.
 1 (0%)  
 The open beam concept shows the strength of steel, and the tapered sections and open theme reflect advances in steel design and materials optimization that are also echoed in the new Brown's stadium and Progressive field.
 1 (0%)  
 While A may be nostolgic, I see the Y support as strength as a community coming together. B is independent, every man for themself, and C as decoration, sort of false sense of security.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C has all of the above stated attributes.
 1 (0%)  
 B is too plain. C would meet this criteria if the cable-support system were carried the entire length of the structure.
 1 (0%)  
 I love it.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge c is at least a modern look
 1 (0%)  
 All bridges here are equally sad. I echo the sentiments of the Cleveland Plain Dealer. Despite 10 years and $13 million, ODOT has handed us tired, lackluster designs. Alseneas's southerly plan should've been examined by more than just the ODOT-appointed engineering firm. What a sad thing that ODOT, whose members have pled guilty of corruption, is allowed to hold a monopoly over our transportation choices (including, as here, the lack of breadth of choices that we are given).
 1 (0%)  
Total: 479

9. D. The design of the approaches and main spans should be consistent and coherent across the entire valley, and speak with a single design vocabulary.

How well does each design reflect the above criteria?

  
Does not meet Criteria
Meets Criteria
Exceeds Criteria
(%)1110241935
Bridge A
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
 12345
(%)29223693
Bridge B
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
 12345
(%)2417221324
Bridge C
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
12345
Total: 1351

10. Please provide further explanation or comments regarding your selections for Question D

 all bridge designs look uniform and meet criteria
 1 (0%)  
 They all seem to be consistent in their individual designs
 1 (0%)  
 See previous comments
 1 (0%)  
 Plan A meets the criteria most.
 1 (0%)  
 On bridge C there is only 1 section that has the arches. 
 1 (0%)  
 I really like bridge C.
 1 (0%)  
 Both Bridges A and B are practically symmetrical which one would want to bring on "a single design vocabulary."  But they don't "reach out or grab" for attention like C provides, and deserves.  The wavy appearances above the bridge convey symmetry, but also motion.
 1 (0%)  
 The design of C is not consistent. The main span and supports feel bland and generic, while the small suspension portion is appealing. Both B and C look and feel similar to other bridges in Northeast Ohio. The most consistent design would be choice A. It speaks of a combination of both old and new design in Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 they all meet this criteria but obviously none are a strong forward design
 1 (0%)  
 It would do just that, consistent in the desighn through out the valley just technologically advanced.
 1 (0%)  
 It does not appear that the approaches are presented in any of the renderings provided. The main spans for each appear to be consistent across the valley.
 1 (0%)  
 A is very suitable.
 1 (0%)  
 Don't have a comment
 1 (0%)  
 As mentioned earlier the river span should be special and can easliy blend with other spans approaching what should be the center of attention - the eye catcher if you will.
 1 (0%)  
 No comments needed
 1 (0%)  
 Again self explanitory just look at it.
 1 (0%)  
 Consistently uninspired.
 1 (0%)  
 See other comments
 1 (0%)  
 I prefer C as it has style
 1 (0%)  
 Huh??
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is awful. A is better. C could be great - but rest of bridge, other than cable arch, is boring.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is clearly consistent; Bridge B is consistently boring from end to end; Bridge C places it's emphasis on the east side approach only.
 1 (0%)  
 Aside from bridge C, we don't really see the approaches for bridges a and b in any of the renderings. The approach to bridge C near gateway doesn't seem to fit with the rest of the bridge. It would have been nice to see an overall view of each design showing the entire span and approaches.
 1 (0%)  
 My only criticism of design C is that the arches don't appear to be coherent with the rest of the structure. On the other hand, that is their appeal. They stand out. In the valley, the river is a relatively small part of the expanse, so there no single dominating feature. All three bridges do a good job spanning the valley in a consistent way.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C's design vocabulary is confused and incoherent. Bridge B does the best job of maintaining a single design vocabulary.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A and B are both coherent and consistent, while with Bridge C I am curious about whether the arches over Ontario will be repeated over Abbey Avenue, or additionally over the new bridge, and whether or not having two or 4 sets of these arches will seem too redundant.
 1 (0%)  
 See previous responses.
 1 (0%)  
 All the designs get travelers to point a to poin b.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C has a fresh appearance, not what Cleveland is. We need fresh designs to make Cleveland stand out, not look the same as it always has.
 1 (0%)  
 c's arches and cables as opposed to the straight spans seems to be a mixture of two elements
 1 (0%)  
 C, when looked at with Progressive Field in the background is very cool.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A and B both keep the same idea throughout the whole bridge, while Bridge C has the supports which seem to, in a sense, not fit in correctly.
 1 (0%)  
 The approaches and main span of both designs A& B look to be consistent with what we now have. Bridge C is a more modern contrast to the Detroit-Superior Bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges B and C are consistent, in their uninspired, plain design and appearance.
 1 (0%)  
 Each bridge seems consistent from the few pictures that are available.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C does not show consistancy with the suspension section
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A and B are consistent, Bridge C is not. Why should this be necessary?
 1 (0%)  
 All are consistent. But Bridge B and C do nothing aesthetically above the street. This is unfortunate.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is more traditional. Bridge C is more cutting edge. What it may lack for in fitting it, it should make up for by standing out.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is more like our other bridges, but so what?
 1 (0%)  
 The drawings really didn't address the approaches, only the main spans.
 1 (0%)  
 no comment
 2 (1%) 
 
 A and B do exceed that criteria - but those spans are BORING!!! Build something new!
 1 (0%)  
 Not enough info provided to answer this question
 1 (0%)  
 These bridge designs would simply blend into the scenery and add no value to the landscape
 1 (0%)  
 the 2 spires above the birdge on C looks so out of place. and doesn't fit the whole bridge
 1 (0%)  
 see comment for item C
 1 (0%)  
 I have to say C (my favorite) is in many ways a departure for the valley, which is a large part of why I like it. It's not the same design vocabulary!!!
 1 (0%)  
 I guess the main spans are consistent. Why is that important?
 1 (0%)  
 A has the nicest looking span, then C, then boring old B.
 1 (0%)  
 They all probably fit the numbness of this particular criteria.
 1 (0%)  
 Very modest. This is the Gateway to Cleveland, the lake, both the west and east side of cleveland. I don't see any majestic appeal to either of the entrances. One of the concepts does address the ends of the bridge a little bit better with the cable spans and concrete forms but it doesn't look resolved, it almost appears that this was a successful element from another project pulled to this project as an add on. Trying not to be negative about this, but the city of Cleveland, the State of Ohio, and the population in both need something to be proud about. Look at the I-280 bridge in Toledo, OH that spans the Maumee river and you will see inspiration, art, and architecture risk taking.
 1 (0%)  
 I don't see any clear winner in this category.
 1 (0%)  
 This goes along with Question B... Bridge B fits in with our exhisting boring bridge architecture while Bridges A and C bring something new. Why didn't we just rebuild Municipal Stadium? because we wanted something new and interesting!
 1 (0%)  
 They are all a little booring.
 1 (0%)  
 I also disagree with this statement. The new bridge should be that; new. One reason Cleveland isn't on the map with other cities is that we are doing nothing to modernize our landscape. The city is stagnating as a city of the past while others are racing ahead of us in leaps and bounds. Tourist dollars are not coming in here when there is much Cleveland has to offer.
 1 (0%)  
 A and B look consistent from end to end Bridge C has a distinctive approach bridge, and dull plain main span.
 1 (0%)  
 A has provided some nice archtectural details aross the whole structure B is too consistent........ C gives a good attempt at trying something unique
 1 (0%)  
 None of the brdiges would look out of place, nor break with the 'single design vocabulary'
 1 (0%)  
 its large and inviting to bring everyone into a cith that carries you through
 1 (0%)  
 I love A and C designs. They are polar opposites however, each has awonderful feel and design.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is pretty yet unobtrusive. Bridge B meets this criteria but is more plain than thematic.
 1 (0%)  
 The materials used (steel & cable supports) speak of our city's past while the design maintains a contemporary feeling.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A and B have a similar look but A provides lights and interesting sculpting while C seems to have arches that do not fit in with the rest of the bridges in the area.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A & B is definitely consistent but C is a landmark to come.
 1 (0%)  
 Really can not comment as the approach views are not available on the web site. Otherwise, Bridge A again is the winner as its spans are consistent across the valley. Bridge C is certainly not consistent. It looks like B with an added cable support.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B does not provide any architectural coherency across the valley. Bridge A best represents this point while bridge C's main span is boring until the arch.
 1 (0%)  
 Reminds me of Florida Bridges
 1 (0%)  
 If there is only one set of arches on C, then they look out of place, and the rest of the bridge lacks interest. I like the arches, especially how they're lit at night, but it needs continuation of that interest across the entire valley.
 1 (0%)  
 The Bridge C arch is only 1 span over Ontario St and the rest of the bridge a bland interstate span.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A & B meet the basic requirements. Bridge C goes beyond.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A carries the V design all across. Bridge B is just plain compared to Bridge A Bridge C has arches on by the stadium.
 1 (0%)  
 From the design renderings, Bridge A is the only one that truly meets the criteria set for a single design vocabulary.
 1 (0%)  
 Plan c looks dramatic in design the spiral dome-like columns overhead on each is stunning fills the gap of just a plain bridge going across a stretch of open land.....
 1 (0%)  
 bridges (a) and (b) are consistant accross the valley.
 1 (0%)  
 designs speak for themselves.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A meets this criteria as there is a clear consistency of design all along the structure. Ditto on Bridge C. However, Bridge B seems a bit disjointed since the suspension doesn't span the entire bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is consistent to another bridge( I-480) somewhat. It flows with the surrounding area.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C appears to be unifrom and consistent.
 1 (0%)  
 meets criteria
 1 (0%)  
 ??????
 1 (0%)  
 Assuming Bridge A will employ evenly spaced risers, it makes the best consistent, cohesive statement across the valley. Bridge B does as well, but its single design vocabulary is limited to one word - boring. Bridge C interrupts the consistent flow with one pleasing statement, but it appears to be parenthetical, both in its frowning shape and as a tacked-on afterthought.
 1 (0%)  
 I'd like to see more of Bridge C.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge a speaks to the cosistency and cohesiveness of the design
 1 (0%)  
 They all do that. I would prefer to see something more dramatic in A & B. C adds a distinct feature and yet still manages a consistent feel.
 1 (0%)  
 UNFORTUNATELY A and B meet these criteria as they speak with the vocabulary of 'boring'. The uniqueness of bridge C appears to only be in one area, so therefore the design is not consistent across the valley.
 1 (0%)  
 n/a
 3 (1%) 
 
 sorry, see above
 1 (0%)  
 Again, I still like C better.
 1 (0%)  
 All 3 bridges seem consistent in design across the entire span.
 1 (0%)  
 They all speak in their own vocabulary-change and flare is what we need and want!!
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A unquestionably meets the stated requirements for item D. As I noted early, bridge C seems to be trying to reproduce a scaled down version of similar bridges in Boston and elsewhere, with half-hearted effort and suboptimal execution. Bridge C certainly does not show a design that is consistent and coherent across the valley. Bridge B is "just a bridge" and would detract from the valley's bridges, not improve their overall character.
 1 (0%)  
 BRIDGE A: AWESOME design and use of green space!! Bridge B: boring Bridge C nice retrodesgin, yet boring in the is just steel and concert/cement lacks any use of green space
 1 (0%)  
 I am unable to reconcile the first two pdf depictions of Bridge C with the third, unable to envision how the arches shown in the first two appear when the entire span is viewed. Don't understand how those elements disappear in the third view of the same bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Sleek concrete supports. The problem with concrete is the freeze thaw destruction....
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B has no iconic detail and Bridge C offers a pointless suspension bridge attached to a fairly boring stretch the rest of the span.
 1 (0%)  
 Consistent does not mean good. Consistent just means the same. Same as a plastic shopping bag. Did a lawyer write the criteria?
 1 (0%)  
 The pictures offer no insight into the approaches. Design C clearly focused only on one unintegrated design feature area. Nothing leads to it, nothing comes from it.
 1 (0%)  
 very boring designs
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge c is completely inconsistant with this criteria.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C does not carry the arches forward far enough to be consistent and coherent.
 1 (0%)  
 Decorative pillar designs set Bridge C apart. Bridge A attempted something less bold. Bridge B is just plain Jane. If the legs on C of the pillars could taper a bit toward the footers or have mitred corners that would add a real bit of visual flair. Even the pillar support arches could be less uniform, more parbolic.
 1 (0%)  
 The above-roadway arch of Bridge C is consistent but more interesting.
 1 (0%)  
 I disagree with the question. I feel anything new should be radically different looking. I cannot score any bridge for this criteria, so I have marked all of them as "does not meet".
 1 (0%)  
 Although they may be consistent, bridge B is consistantly ugly across the entire span. I can be it will have the cheapest price tag and that will be what ODOT builds.
 1 (0%)  
 once again bad question
 1 (0%)  
 All three meet the criteria.
 1 (0%)  
 a bridge does not have to be coherent with others. it is time to stand out in our city
 1 (0%)  
 Why should the designs be consistent? Do we need this bridge to look like it was built in the 20th Century? Why can't we come up with something that makes a new statement? Why must it blend in with the background?
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is the most consistent, but Bridge C is fresh. We ned to break free from the "old Cleveland" while honoring it's history. Bridge C, without the arches, is similar to other bridges in Cleveland but the progressive design is a much needed fresh look to a struggling city.
 1 (0%)  
 It's OK.
 1 (0%)  
 The 2 other bridges are artistic underneath which drivers do not enjoy. C gives us a majestic bridge to erase "mistake on the lake".
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is boring and lacks interest. Bridge A stands out as being visual stunning and functional.
 1 (0%)  
 If you're looking for consistency, these are the bridges for you: consistently boring, but consistent and coherent across the valley.
 1 (0%)  
 Consistent is good, but doesn't equal interesting.
 1 (0%)  
 See my previous comments above.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A goes well with existing structures. Bridge B appears too plain Bridge C totally out of place in area.
 1 (0%)  
 C has inconsistency in the flat nature of the span with the arch at the downtown end
 1 (0%)  
 What is the "Wow factor" for any of these designs? Answer: NONE.
 1 (0%)  
 same as C and B.
 1 (0%)  
 OK. duh...but who knows when we only see a portion of the design?
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A strikes me as a modern take on the other valley bridges. B&C both seem more reflective of the 480 bridge
 1 (0%)  
  Currently this area is a total mixture of styles. there is no single vocabulary?
 1 (0%)  
 Does not look at all like the cool bridges on the lower level.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A just seems to flow nicely with the landccape.
 1 (0%)  
 You can't really tell much of anything about the approaches from what has been released.
 1 (0%)  
 Why should each bridge be consistent and coherent. It's time to move forward and make some bold choices.
 1 (0%)  
 None fit this criteria.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A offers the greatest amount of consistency of the three designs
 1 (0%)  
 With amazing lighting and views from the valley as well from across the skyline, the bridge "A" plan and "B" matches what other bridges in the city resemble.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is a boring monotonous span, bridge C has some visual interest, but bridge A is by far the most pleasing.
 1 (0%)  
 They are all consistent and coherent, if not boring.
 1 (0%)  
 Only drawback of each design is the pressure points where the steel meets the concrete. Is the weight distribution adequate to handle all the weight, and is there enough room on bridges "B" and "C" between the deck and the concrete to absorb the shock waves created by the vehicles going over them?
 1 (0%)  
 I prefer Bridge C.
 2 (1%) 
 
 I think that Bridge A will fit in the best seeing what is in the surrounding areas. Here is some food for thought though, at the time the surrounding bridges, that dont work, were built, did they fit in the surrounding area. Probably not. Theses are still cool to look at and think how they all used to work and be in operation. This is clevelands time to put something fresh and new in there city. Cleveland is not doing so well in the economy so this is something fresh and new that Clevalnders havent seen in a long time
 1 (0%)  
 What is the deal with C's small artsy bridge at the end?
 1 (0%)  
 Driver friendly
 1 (0%)  
 C obviously speaks a different design within its span
 1 (0%)  
 Again, this stretches across the valley holding the same design from beginning to end. Bridge B and C have too much activity in just the central points. Making the bridge and surroundings look clutter and desperate.
 1 (0%)  
 The arch span is in a perfect location - in the Gateway District - gives the area a sense of newness and motion. This is what people who visit our city will see and be impressed by - the other bridges will be underneath the pavement!! How many of us look at the bottom of the Bunker Hill Bridge in Boston - we see what's above.
 1 (0%)  
 All three speak to a single design, but all three designs are not what I would consider to be a design worthy of such a span.
 1 (0%)  
 The designs submitted of the approaches & main spans reallynare consistent & coherent across the entire valley. Consistently & coherently quite boring & bland! Once again ODOT, you're right on the mark!
 1 (0%)  
 Boring!
 1 (0%)  
 All have clean lines.
 1 (0%)  
 Bad criteria.
 1 (0%)  
 Every bridge Cleveland has is just that - a bridge. There is no unique design to want to make people stop and take notice.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges B & C are OK. A looks consistent from start to finish.
 1 (0%)  
 The look of these bridges doesn nothing to match with the rich desing that speeks to Cleveland's rich industrial past, or its being the "North Coast"
 1 (0%)  
 Again, Bridge C doesn't bring a consistent feel across the entire valley. Bridge B does but is lacking character is so many ways. Bridge A carriers out this mission.
 1 (0%)  
 It is consistent (A) where the other two seem to be awkward.
 1 (0%)  
 It flows from one span to another quite well. The roadway portion sits perfectly on the spans.
 1 (0%)  
 Well, they surely do this. This criteria is just asking for mediocrity and it is highly achieved.
 1 (0%)  
 Again, Bridge A is a complete design with eloquent lines that repeat and are aesthetically pleasing-an artists dream!
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A and B are most consistent and coherent and speak with a single design vocabulary. For Bridge C, the single set of arches looks out of place with the rest of the bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Again, cable arches at just one end, in one spot!
 1 (0%)  
 They are all boring, there is nothing to even say about this question, as the design pics shown do not show in detail the entrances of the bridges etc.
 1 (0%)  
 A far exceeds the others - best designs are simple, yet elegant. In its thickness of design elements, it matches the older bridges in the area, while infusing a graceful edge of the future.
 1 (0%)  
 The Arches of C definitely don't do this...
 1 (0%)  
 The valley is expansive too. I think the finished product will lead to more peaceful scenery.
 1 (0%)  
 They are all very good consistent bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C has certain aspects that are similar to other bridges (with the main span of it), but the "wings" thing is kinda fruity. Bridge B an Bridge A have certain aspects to them that could meet the criteria when compared to other bridges in the area.
 1 (0%)  
 The PDF renderings all fall short in their presentation to the public to make a judgement call on this question. One can only assume the design is carried through. A larger overview with actual picture of the approaches is needed.
 1 (0%)  
 Lacks warmth
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B again went to match the current bridge's bland style. Bridge A and C create the perfect flow into Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 They all look fitting with the rest of Cleveland
 1 (0%)  
 The designs speak for them selves.
 1 (0%)  
 See previous comments.
 1 (0%)  
 All bridges should be distinctive. What other cities have all of their bridges match.
 1 (0%)  
 A is best
 1 (0%)  
 bridge A's y-bridge openness and smooth repeating circular shapes blend together so seem like they can be extended across the valley without looking as overly repetitive or labored as do the B and C
 1 (0%)  
 Design A does reflect any theme present in Cleveland. The renderings made available do not show the vision of the approaches, however the Bridge C design clearly creates a unique entrance to the spans and the City.
 1 (0%)  
 best of the 3 ~ wish it were more dramatic like the new bridge in toledo
 1 (0%)  
 A and B have solid, consistent design
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C doesn't meet the criteria because the arches are only over a small portion. If the arches went across the whole bridge, it would be more consistent and coherent, but it would also block the views of the city a bit I think.
 1 (0%)  
 A represents the best consistent and Coherent look
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A would bring some character. Bridge B probably if you are going for a cost cutting approach. Bridge C a lot of the bridges in the valley have character as well but more of an understated character.
 1 (0%)  
 Yes, they are all consistently as boring as most of the rest of the bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B just seems to be lacking something.
 1 (0%)  
 All the arches are consistent. I prefer A for its lightness of approach.
 1 (0%)  
 See question C.
 1 (0%)  
 Number 2, in my opinion, means " I DON'T KNOW " The pictures provided don't offer enough information to answer question D, except as it pertains to bridge C . The arches seem artificially placed in order to speak to more than a single design vocabulary.
 1 (0%)  
 A and B could be coherent to what is already there. C, while really neat to look out, may not be very consistent.
 1 (0%)  
 Assuming bridges carry out main design, then A succeeds.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C flows with its form.
 1 (0%)  
 C looks awesome, and A looks pretty cool. B is boring.
 1 (0%)  
 All seem adequate, but Bridge C adds a touch of "flair" with its arches. Bridges A and B seem pedestrian by comparison.
 1 (0%)  
 There is nothing balaced about our skyline, so why do you strive for balance with this bridge? Of course it would be foolish to have spans of 230ft, 290ft, 120ft, etc. But how about something different like several shorter and then a very long span met by several shorter ones again?
 1 (0%)  
 Nailed this one!
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A and B met the criteria since they are "run of the mill" type bridges. No where as unique as C.
 1 (0%)  
 N/A
 1 (0%)  
 This criteria means that the bridge should be the same all the way across its span. Bridge A & B are the same monotonous design the whole way across so they meet this standard.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A&B blend into the valley because the valley is most look an old bridge, more that look almost the same, oh look, the new bridge that looks like the boring old ones. Bridge C is like this: Wow! That looks different and not boring and new, not old.
 1 (0%)  
 It seems that these questions are loaded. The idea that we should continue with the old designs is inherently biased.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A strays far enough from current designs of other bridges in the area, but still close enough for some consistency. Bridge B is plain and uninspiring. Bridge C is the most unique but far from the design of other bridges in the area.
 1 (0%)  
 One astonishing piece of architecture will inspire more to come. You have to start somewhere.
 1 (0%)  
 The cabled arch at Ontario Street is offcenter and non-sensical. Why isn't that central, focusing element at the focal point of the bridge? Or is it just eye candy for baseball fans who are disgusted with the play on the field or looking for a place to smoke?
 1 (0%)  
 Did ANYBODY look at the other bridges before coming up with this trash? Isn't this statement in direct conflict with C?
 1 (0%)  
 see all above.
 1 (0%)  
 I would hope every bridge in the world is designed with this criteria. This was a rather ridiculous criteria.
 1 (0%)  
 BC and structures I wil cal them cut. In the long run say two hundred years where wil they be. I wil tell you the structure wil have failed rebar in the Cement. The C structure wil have cables starting or failing due to corrosion from the salt spray kicked up by the cars in the winter.
 1 (0%)  
 They all appear to be consistent. Listen, I like the cable the everything else around it looks 'weak' ...I just want more body to it.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A and B are very consistent however I do not see this a plus since they are dated design styles, as for Bridge C it does not meet the criteria because according to the artists renderings the spans design changes and I see that as a big mistake whereas were it to imitate the Sunshine Skyway Bridge over Tampa Bay in that both span lead up to the climax in either direction and the climax of the design directly close to or in the middle gives it an effect of a true Architectural masterpiece.
 1 (0%)  
 once again I feel that Bridge C is the most like other bridges in the valley.
 1 (0%)  
 I believe that the way Bridge C stands out is a positive attribute. Cleveland is an old city that has old building and needs to modernize its infrastructure. Outsiders will see the modernization as a step into the future.
 1 (0%)  
 All boringly span the valley. Bridge C, however, fails to even do that in totality.
 1 (0%)  
 Why the silly arches on one end of C? Why at the end? Why only one end? I don't like the idea of an arch at all on this bridge. It's too close to Hope Memorial. Any arch just would not look right.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A & B speak the same vocabulary as all the other bridges but there's nothing that pops out. Bridge C talks the talks but walks a different walk which I think is important for visitors to see Cleveland is still a great, hip city.
 1 (0%)  
 really not sure about this
 1 (0%)  
 The design is boring and needs updated
 1 (0%)  
 No comment.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is not consisten it is would look unbalanced with only portion having cable system.
 1 (0%)  
 A is an attractive, clean look. B is too basic, lacks personality C intrudes on the skyline, too loud
 1 (0%)  
 All bridges look consistant
 1 (0%)  
 Matching EXISTING OLD ARCHAIC designs is NOT progressive
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has beautiful flowing design elements, Bridge B is too drab and unnoticeable for $450m, Bridge C is too disjointed.
 1 (0%)  
 Only bridge C shows that there is a difference going over the river. Otherwise bridges A and B are completly uniform in appearance from approaches to the bridge itself. There is no difference from bridge to approach ramps. You have to really look to see any difference.
 2 (1%) 
 
 Again, Bridge C is too distracting. A & B meet the criteria but my choice is A because it keeps the "feel" of the city with a nice new clean look.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C gives the city character.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is not consistant.
 1 (0%)  
 Okay, bridge A meets the consistant and coherent but C adds flare to the design.
 1 (0%)  
 See comments on Question A.
 1 (0%)  
 See Comments for Question A
 1 (0%)  
 Hard to really tell with the given info. Bridge C is the only option that creates something unique for Cleveland. I really like how the arches create a "Gateway" effect into and out of the city.
 1 (0%)  
 It is a one of a kind.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C's arches evoke the natural beauty of the Cuyahoga Valley, creating a unique design aesthetic.
 1 (0%)  
 Exactly, does B or C do that, not that I can see. These are clearly 3 different designs.
 1 (0%)  
 B is too plain while C is like nothing we have.
 1 (0%)  
 Same as above comment, Only Bridge A seems to meet this criteria.
 1 (0%)  
 See comments in A.
 1 (0%)  
 What the hell does this mean?
 1 (0%)  
 A and B are alright in this regard, but C has that special quality that sets it apart.
 1 (0%)  
 Simetry flows. Very Elegant
 1 (0%)  
 its very nice to look at
 1 (0%)  
 This is difficult to answer since there are only limited views of each design and none can be compared since each firm used different points of view.
 1 (0%)  
 BRIDGE "A" IS THE CLEAR WINNER. IT IS THE ONLY DESIGN THAT CARRIES A CONSISTENT DESIGN THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE BRIDGE LENGHT. BRIDGE "C" WHILE INTERESTING OVER ONTARIO IS COMPLETLY BORING FOR THE REMAINING LENGHT OF THE NEARLY MILE LONG BRIDGE.
 1 (0%)  
 it looks like it has an easy flow.
 1 (0%)  
 Design b is too similar to all bridges not to be consistent with the valley, but it feels less like a design and more like a function. Bridges A and C both incorporate parts of the area in understated ways.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge A and B are very consistent. bridge C looks like someone built a cheap bridge and decided to throw a little ginger bread in one spot . I heard the bridge is over 3000 ft long yet bridge C put the cable portion in only 200 to 300 ft ard that the bridge is over 300
 1 (0%)  
 I feel Bridge A is the only bridge talking at all.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C does not appear to be consistent and coherent with the arches in a small span compared to the overall span.
 1 (0%)  
 Works best for Cleveland
 1 (0%)  
 B is the only design which hold true to the typical design found throughout the Cleveland area.
 1 (0%)  
 the design is beautiful and would do so much for the valley and for downtown
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C definitely has a different approach with it's above grade structure.
 1 (0%)  
 It has the WOW factor for sure
 1 (0%)  
 I really don't see that Bridge A isn't complementary to the current bridges within OH it is different and memorable on its own yet it works with the design through out OH
 1 (0%)  
 I feel that Bridge A would be best for our state and catch the eyes of our fellow Americans.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C has that one interesting area, the rest is boring and does not appear to be a single, fluid design.
 1 (0%)  
 They fit in with other spans in the dullest fashion possible.
 1 (0%)  
 They are consistent, but consistently dull and conventional.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A approach and main spans are consistent. Bridge B approaches appear to be markedly different than the main span Bridge C: arch design does not blend will with the approach spans
 1 (0%)  
 The cables on Bridge C add a nice touch to a modern bridge, but set it apart just enough to make it unique.
 1 (0%)  
 Who knows? You have not provided picture of the approaches.
 1 (0%)  
 Boring
 1 (0%)  
 A has cosistent style but not to overpowering or too futuristic like C is.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A and B are consistent (in their plainness). Bridge C tries to be two bridges at once - 10% interesting and 90% dull.
 1 (0%)  
 They are the same as what we have. I would, however, support something that is not like what we already have. Why not push for better.
 1 (0%)  
 How many times can I say it - The simplicity of bridge B will be consistent with all due to its simplicity
 1 (0%)  
 D seems to be designed solely for the aspect above Ontario. Outside of the, it is simply bridge B.
 1 (0%)  
 see above
 1 (0%)  
 Not enough information to make judgement.
 1 (0%)  
 the current design vocabulary is swahilii
 1 (0%)  
 A and B are consistant and amazingly boring. C does not have all sections the same, but this should not have been a design criteria in the first place.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C captures coherency of the valley's bridges yet demonstrates progress in technology.
 1 (0%)  
 All bridges are consistant and coherant
 1 (0%)  
 Available images do not appear to show approaches. Bridge A at least appears to show a coherent, consistent overall design. Bridge C works against the natural flow and elements of the valley and approaches, by using cable arches at the ends, rather than the middle portion over the river. This effectively creates a visual blockage in the area around the approaches, while destroying or diminishing the visual impact at the more prominent central area of the bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Again "A" accomplishes this the best in my opinion.
 1 (0%)  
 It is important to create a large flow of traffic to bring more business and activity to the downtown area.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C seems to be the only one that is not consistent, but the arches would add to the city's appearance.
 1 (0%)  
 I am not really an expert on bridges, and am not quite sure I understand that question. Regardless, I choose bridge 3 as the new design.
 1 (0%)  
 "Speak with a single design vocabulary?" BWAHAHAHAHA
 1 (0%)  
 Love the retro Art-deco touches to the piers!
 1 (0%)  
 I like the look of the main spans -- it's a nice design.
 1 (0%)  
 Flows very well
 1 (0%)  
 The main span of bridge C has a sleek appearance.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is very consistend and coherent across the entire valley and the single design is poetic.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is almost too modern
 1 (0%)  
 All Consistent, but again B is boring
 1 (0%)  
 All look cosistent and the same across the span.
 1 (0%)  
 The bridges may speak in a language which is a derative of the 'valley language' instead of repeating what has been done. These proposals are a disappointment.
 1 (0%)  
 This question is pure bullshit. If ODOT were truly interested in the aesthetics of bridge construction, it would locate the structures so as not to bisect our city but to maximize contiguous living space with a focus on showcasing our natural resources (i.e., the lake). We have squandered the lakefront on a rarely used football stadium (for the second time), a mini-airport which should be relocated, and an industrial port facility that needs a new home. None of the bridges will address these concerns. Bridge A, however, will at least provide a positive architectural feature to the area.
 1 (0%)  
 none
 1 (0%)  
 What in the world is a "single design vocabulary" in relation to bridges???!!
 1 (0%)  
 C's above-deck portion could be more expressive of the existing bridges in the valley. The existing bridges, if you count all of them including the shorter spans below, are truly varied both in function, engineering and style.
 1 (0%)  
 C is Simply consistent and beautiful to the eye. I could imagine it lit up at night.
 1 (0%)  
 I feel Bridge C does this, but again also adds some flair.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A maximizes the use of the underlying area.
 1 (0%)  
 The symmetry of the cable arch provides a pleasant break in the long span.
 1 (0%)  
 Consistent and coherent here appears to equal completely without detail or visual interest.
 1 (0%)  
 They look pretty similar to most other ODOT designs.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C seems to differ in appearance further down the bridge while A and B remain constant.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A & B are consistent across the valley. Bridge C does not meet the criteria.
 1 (0%)  
 The designs may meet the criteria, but they are cookie cutter designs that are bland and copied.
 1 (0%)  
 The Steel web design of Bridge A is consistent with Cleveland, Installing a Cable Stay section as in Bridge C will take away from the design flow across the bridge
 1 (0%)  
 Because the design of the approaches are not shown, it is not possible to assess the consistency and coherence of the approaches and the main spans. By leaving out the approaches, it appears an honest assessment was not desired.
 1 (0%)  
 Although A and B are bland the spires proposed on C should not be only over Broadway Avenue but over the whole bridge making it consistent.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges a and B be are consistant. Bridge A being pleasing to the eye and Bridge b not. Bridge C is not consistant throughout.
 1 (0%)  
 I cannot tell what the approaches look like from the renderings.
 1 (0%)  
 Three pictures of each bridge isn't enough but Bridge A caught my eye.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A meets a great architecture look as well as being consistent. Bridge B is consistent but is not very interesting and Bridge C has one interesting architecture area but is not consistent.
 1 (0%)  
 Each design is consistently dull and bland across the river. Each design, in their entirety, looks as if it were designed in 1965, and not in the 21st Century These are dull and unimaginative designs. Thes designs look like slightly modified highway overpass bridges found all across the USA for the PAST 40 years! These 3 dull designs look like the thousands of other highway overpasses in the US - These designs look like they could come from an overpass in Montana or Nevada or Mississippis or Delaware or Arkansas or any other place since there is style to these designs. There is little that is unique about these unimaginative designs. There is "no design in these designs"; just elongated highway overpasses. Depressingly dull designs which will haunt the entryway to downtown Cleveland for the next 50 years
 1 (0%)  
 See comment to A.
 1 (0%)  
 The single design vocabulary has been met if that word is "bland"
 1 (0%)  
 In the photo rendering, Bridge A has a sleek design, and all spans look consistent.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge c
 1 (0%)  
 Coherent, sure, but aren't part of any conversation I'm interested in participating.
 1 (0%)  
 All three are consistent. Can't argue that.
 1 (0%)  
 From the pictures it seems that the approaches are not very exciting --
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C looks as if multiple different bridges were put together; it comes nowhere close to achieving a single design vocabulary. Bridge B achieves this, but Bridge A does it more successfully.
 1 (0%)  
 A combines past with new technology. B is plain and unoriginal. C does not comply with a singl design, as it appears to have irregular cable-stay arches with linearly segmental bridge approach spans.
 1 (0%)  
 I like the design and feel it meets the criteria.
 1 (0%)  
 "C" arch is way too short to be consistent, the arches would need to be carried at least at the opposing end!
 1 (0%)  
 I'll say that they meet the criteria, and add that the criteria are pretty awful. What design vocabulary should they be speaking with? What is there to emulate? If you enter I-77 northbound from Route 21, around Brookpark Rd, you can see a fine example of failed concrete and exposed rebar. Are we emulating that?
 1 (0%)  
 A and B both meet the criteria but A does it with much more style.
 1 (0%)  
 This design is a little different, but I think it maybe time for something a little difeerent. Change is good, we do not travel as we used to years ago, so our bridges cannot be as they were years ago.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge design C is consistent with the New ODOT bridges
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is clean from abutment to abutment. Bridge B is just too plain a waste to build it. Bridge B OK for center spans but the approaches are completely different.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A speaks from a position of strength and flexibility and safety. Bridge B, in particular from the pictures, looks out of place and quite frankly, insubstantial.
 1 (0%)  
 I feel that the different designs are equal in this regard.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is the only design that is imaginative throughout. Bridge B and 95% of Bridge C is a design left over from decades ago.
 1 (0%)  
 It's funny, because the bridge with the cable-stays at one small end of the bridge doesn't even adhere to this policy.
 1 (0%)  
 If the goal was to replicate the Valley View Bridge (part of I-480), then this project was very unfortunately successful. If the goal was to coordinate with the other bridges in the vicinity of the Innerbelt (including the railroad bridges and lift and swing bridges in the Flats), then these designs fail spectacularly. There is no coherency or consistency with the far more interesting historical bridges of the Flats, and there is nothing akin to the Lorain-Carnegie bridge, with its very distinctive Art Deco Guardians.
 1 (0%)  
 Same as above
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C somehow loses touch with a consistent design theme as it suddenly reaches for the sky.
 1 (0%)  
 Same as answer "B"
 1 (0%)  
 Pictures did not show the entire valley, difficult to judge.
 1 (0%)  
 Not really sure what you mean. I think the arches at the HEART of down town Cleveland add to our architecture. Bridge b is consistent consistently boring. Come on people its going to be the main artery into our city
 1 (0%)  
 "A" is consistent with valley
 1 (0%)  
 the railroad swing bridge has more design and interest.
 1 (0%)  
 "There's trouble right here in river city that starts with t and --- Sounds as if someone was taken on a ride by design firms
 1 (0%)  
 Design A & B certainly are consistent - BLAH. Just a concrete ribbon.
 1 (0%)  
 Clean and open
 1 (0%)  
 I think Bridge A would be a great addition to the many amazing bridges in Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 The photo depictions provided do not sufficiently show the approches. So how can one judge this aspect of the project?
 1 (0%)  
 Not entirely sure what that question even means.
 1 (0%)  
 I have already stated several times, the disgns are very bland and common.
 1 (0%)  
 Except for the minimal arch on Bridge C, I see no special design of the approaches or sight lines.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges don't speak with a vocabulary. They safely and economically transport people, goods and vehicles.
 1 (0%)  
 Look at the pictures, you tell me.
 1 (0%)  
 Design A maintains a consistent theme throughout the project.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C approach span is not consistent with the main spans.
 1 (0%)  
 Yes these are consistenly boring.
 1 (0%)  
 BRIDGE A DOES THIS !! THE SPANS SEEM TO BLEND IN WITH THE AREA.
 1 (0%)  
 What does that matter? So the bridge looks the same from one end to the other. O.K. but its uniformly homely. Where are the iconic designs a bridge of this significance deserves?
 1 (0%)  
 Info not available to answer. Your questionaire should allow for your incompetence!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 1 (0%)  
 The Bridge A design is the most cosistent and coherent of the three designs under consideration.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A displays an aesthetically pleasing look and feel and would be a great look across the valley.
 1 (0%)  
 5 years to decide on THESE, Beauracratic waste AGAIN. Stuck in the mud thinking and I Am The Boss mentality with no regard for those you are supposed to serve.
 1 (0%)  
 I feel the open design, bridge A, is best. The cable stay option doesn't match anything we have, other than a few pedestrian walkways (the tow path, for instance), and bridge B is rather boring.
 1 (0%)  
 While B may conform with other bridges, we already have A in the area and shows character.
 1 (0%)  
 I believe this bridge design would not interfere with the above stated design concerns.
 1 (0%)  
 I suppose all bridges meet this criteria. The approaches are not illustrated, therefore, this question cannot be fully answered.
 1 (0%)  
 just ok
 1 (0%)  
 Can't really see approaches.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge c gives an interesting look to te valley area
 1 (0%)  
 This category makes little sense. If a design is aesthetically unappealing in part, is it somehow a common good that it be "consistent and coherent across" its entirety? I think not.
 1 (0%)  
Total: 361

11. E. The design should maximize the possibility to create a visual image or statement.

How well does each design reflect the above criteria?

  
Does not meet Criteria
Meets Criteria
Exceeds Criteria
(%)1913171635
Bridge A
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
 12345
(%)52241752
Bridge B
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
 12345
(%)2112151240
Bridge C
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
12345
Total: 1351

12. Please provide further explanation or comments regarding your selections for Question E

 Bridge C gives the most stunning visual image with it's suspension cables
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge c is the most eye pleasing, however, it does not fit in with the other bridges in the city. we are not building the golden gate here. we just need a safe bridge. Bridge c would distract from the views that most people enjoy of downtown.
 1 (0%)  
 See previous comments
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is very asthenically pleasing to me.
 1 (0%)  
 Those high arches of Bridge C would definitely add to Cleveland's approach appeal.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C would be an icon....very nice design. The others are rather boring.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C could make a statement from miles away.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is the nicest looking all the way accross with the lighting on the bottom of the bridge making the city and the river look wonderful
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C does just that.
 1 (0%)  
 in this case..A and B look like just standard highway bridges..C wins this one  hands down
 1 (0%)  
 Both bridges A and B are nice in appearance, but C inspires creativity, parallelism, etc.  With Cleveland's devotion to the arts and sciences, this bridge gaps those two areas nicely in apperance.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A and B look like any other Bridge, Bridge C makes a statement
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C cable suspension is visually pleasing. However, this is the only section that creates a statement. The actually span that covers the valley is generic.
 1 (0%)  
 It does just that very pleasing to the eye it reflects a nice clean visual image.
 1 (0%)  
 None of them maximized the possibility of creating a visual image or statement. Bridges B is particularly boring. The cable arch in Bridge C is appealing, but the rest of the bridge is very boring.
 1 (0%)  
 A is the best.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A creates a bold visual image.  Its design is contemporary yet it still manages to encompass the architecture of its surroundings. It is appealing to the eye, unlike Bridge B and C.  Bridge C has a nice arch, but it's only on one span of the bridge.  
 1 (0%)  
 This creates a statement alright. Cleveland is a working town with no form and all function.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is just boring looking to me.  Bridge C is nice to look at, but it almost seems to futuristic or that we're trying to copy another city.  Bridge A has a really nice visual image, especially the way it looks at night.
 1 (0%)  
 On a structure this long a focus point should be provide to avoid boring repitition of spans. This bridge NEEDS  focal point.
 1 (0%)  
 The only "statement" that Bridge C makes is with the unique design element where it crosses over Ontario. Otherwise, it's a forgettable design, as is Bridge B. If anything, both B and C mar the skyline because they look so bland. A at least looks unique and would add to the city's skyline.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is "ho-hum, put me to sleep" Bridge B is "okay" Bridge C is "wow!"
 1 (0%)  
 C is the only one that makes any statement, Again B is purely functional looking, and offers no aesthetic value. One other comment to me it appears that the decision is going to be to go with A, but its sad that C wasn't better developed, because creating something new in cleveland while respecting the past is always the best option, we don't always get a chance to make a great statment and this opportunity should be taken as one.
 1 (0%)  
 Three strikes, unless the statement is 'dull'.
 1 (0%)  
 See other comments
 1 (0%)  
 People will want to be photographed with Bridge C in the background
 1 (0%)  
 I love the way C looks at night
 1 (0%)  
 See above comments.
 1 (0%)  
 Shame a real iconic structure could not be built. Why couldn't cable stay bridge be heated in the cables to avoid icing like in Toledo?
 1 (0%)  
 We have the opportunity to be bold, and create something unique for our city. We should not lose this opportunity. Go big or go home!
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A wins this one...B and C are too plain, aside from the arches on C, which don't seem to fit the rest of that bridges design.
 1 (0%)  
 Again, I love the lights and the lines of Bridge A
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is elegant and shows off the Lorain-Carnegie bridge, called the Hope Bridge, I believe. But it isn't CREATING any statement. Bridge A creates a visual image, but only C creates a statement.
 1 (0%)  
 Given the awful design for these bridges, it would be preferable to make as quiet and innocuous a visual statement as possible. Let this particular bridge blend into the background so that the design for the eastbound bridge (to be built in 20 years) make the statement that ODOT is unwilling to make with the westbound bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A provides a design that would instantly be unique to Cleveland. Though Bridge C provides what would become a new landmark with the arches over Ontario, the arch design would not be unique to our city.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is the most spectacular design that would only accentuate Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A-- Yes, for passengers travelling under the bridge, but not for passengers travelling on the bridge. Bridge B -- Very blah! Its not stately. It just a bridge. I guess for people who don't like change, this design is ideal for them. Bridge C -- Stately and futuristic! The design would be an awesome addition for a new city landmark, since our city skyline lacks skyscrapers!
 1 (0%)  
 The notion that the innerbelt bridge project would maximize the possibility to create a visual image or statement was erased when the Ohio Department of Transportation would not all for the bridge to be a true cable-stayed bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has a great statement with Progressive Field in the backdrop
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is a visual image that Cleveland should be proud of.
 1 (0%)  
 Not only does every design to maximize any visual statement, they fail miserably. Really, these three designs are very disappointing.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C has a fresh appearance, not what Cleveland is. We need fresh designs to make Cleveland stand out, not look the same as it always has.
 1 (0%)  
 A too nostalgic B strong and simple/practical C makes a statement - not sure it's what you want to say.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C makes a statement and reflects a modern, thriving and growing city. Visitors arriving in Cleveland will be impressed.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A will stand out with the back-lights and sophisticated design while bridge B look boring and will not be very memorable to people passing through the city.
 1 (0%)  
 In both the day as well as the nightime renderings, designs A&B maximize the visual image and make a statement. Design B; however, does neither.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges B and C would definitely make a statement. A statement of un-inspired, lack of ingenuity, afterthought, old (not the nice historically old, but the bad and tired old). Bridge A is only slightly better in this category. While there is some interest in the 'lace' effect above each pier, its not much.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C makes the largest visual impact, one that can be seen from below the bridge or while on it. Bridge A also makes a statement but this can only been seen from afar, while on the bridge it will look the same as any other. Bridge B doesn't make a statement.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is more bland than the current bridge. Bridge A has some style but it isn't a bridge that anyone would remember. Bridge C might get more attention, at least for one short stretch, but the rest of the bridge is unmemorable. And even that one stretch of Bridge C with the cables won't make much of a visual statement at the end of the bridge over the road below. That segment should be out over the valley if it is to have any visual impact.
 1 (0%)  
 The signature structure on Bridge C is the only "visual image" provided by any of these structures.
 1 (0%)  
 What statement does just a regular bridge make???
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C+B are boring
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A and C will both look very good from certain viewpoints. Bridge C at its best will be more memorable and iconic than Bridge A at its best. Bridge A may be the safer choice, but Bridge C has the chance to make a real architectural impact.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has a stunning view from the river at night while adding some design flare to the supports for daytime views from below. Bridge B seems to pale when compared to A. Bridge C creates a statement but it's not an one I appreciate. I feel it detracts from the view that already exists.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A & C have done just that.
 1 (0%)  
 The only statement A and B make is "use this bridge - to leave Cleveland."
 1 (0%)  
 Again we need a WOW factor here not Old and tired.
 1 (0%)  
 From the renderings none of the designs seem to add any visual statement
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A just does it all.
 1 (0%)  
 Yes for C!
 1 (0%)  
 None make a statement. This is a rare chance to change the asthetics of the city. This is one of the gateways into downtown. These designs are boring. ODOT, this is shameful.
 1 (0%)  
 I'm surprised there are no cable or suspension bridge designs. None of these designs really stand out from a visual standpoint. The only one that comes close is C followed shortly by A. Cable/Suspension/Cantilever bridges look the best!! Maybe mix C with A and add more cables!
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B and A only make the statement that we have not learned from past mistakes in design, or political sway. Bridge C is the only one that makes a striking image, and a statement that Cleveland will not slink away into the night.
 1 (0%)  
 Not appealing at all. See above comments. I agree the views from below are important but the real frame of this bridge will be what appears above the valley grade. None of these designs address the landscape around it, the city skyline, or the history (future). I see the appeal of letting the driver and passenger see off the bridge into the landscape, but it's the people that are not on the bridge, that will be telling the story. The view from the car will not make into the skyline phots we take of Cleveland.This bridge should contribute to the city landscape, and skyline, not take a back seat to it. This is too much money to spend on something less that spectacular. The people in this state are all too familiar with spending money on intangibles. Let's not re-visit that notion.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge B is just looks like a bridge. Again the Open Triangular supports of A and the Arched cable stays of C show an advanced look in bridge design
 1 (0%)  
 C makes the best impact.
 1 (0%)  
 love the arch in C
 1 (0%)  
 Again, 90% of C and all of B are plain ordinary bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 To my eyes, only 'C' is offering a visual 'statement'
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C makes a very pronounced statement and would be a great visual image for the city
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A and C are just visual clutter not good design. Bridge B at least is not so hideous looking up from below.
 1 (0%)  
 None of these bridge designs blow me away. They are not as ambitious as the new bridge in Toledo and appear a bit bland. Cleveland deserves better.
 1 (0%)  
 WILL BE SEEN FOR A DISTANCE
 1 (0%)  
 At risk of being repetitive, only Bridge C makes a statement. The other two are just bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 I am disappointed that there isn't a Plexiglass-domed bridge to signify Cleveland's openness towards green energy. This would also allow Cleveland pedestrians to use the walkways even during the worse that Old Man Winter can dish out. Also, it would save Cleveland millions in salt and pothole maintenance every year. It would definitely be an iconic bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 an addition to our skyline esp. at night
 1 (0%)  
 why are we not given estimated cost differences?
 1 (0%)  
 I am so excited to give Clveland a much deserved face lift. That bridge is going to add alot to the look when you are coming from the airport into the city. It will be impressive. Clveland needs it's image improved. We have a bad rap.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A looks great lit up but plain Jane during the day. Bridge C give that feel day and night.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C has character and a modern feel - just what Cleveland needs. The other two bridges look ordinary.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is the most dynamic design -- clean, fluid lines sweeping the horizon...
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A and C add interesting visual images and statements while Bridge B seems ordinary and boring.
 1 (0%)  
 No explanation is necessary because this is definitely a visual image to be proud of.
 1 (0%)  
 The visual image created by all is good. A does it with class and style. B is a design that my 5 year old grandson could come up with.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A and C are visual statements. B is not. Combine A and C for a real visual statment!
 1 (0%)  
 Shows we are a progressing city
 1 (0%)  
 While Bridge A lacks personality from on top of the bridge, it has some beautiful lines underneath. Bridge B speaks nothing to me. Bridge C has the visual interest on top (at least where the arches are), but lacks visual interest underneath on the third drawing (I like the blue color, though).
 1 (0%)  
 It's a statement about our city moving forward.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A makes a bold statement. Bridge B statement "Boring old typical" Bridge C minus the arch is a typical bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is the only one to make a visual statement.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A shows we are improving the image of the city. Bridge B says 'I am a bridge' nothing more. Bridge C only highlights the stadium.
 1 (0%)  
 It does creat a visual image of the overhead spiral columns on each side of the bridge
 1 (0%)  
 bota (a) and (c) stand out one desirable (a) and one not sdesirable (c).
 1 (0%)  
 All three bridges meet this criteria, however Bridge C has the edge here with its unique suspension at the most visually appropriate location.
 1 (0%)  
 It will show others that Cleveland stands for building a good strong bridge with out all the uneeded extras. Good sense.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C creates a unique visual statement with the arch span. Bridge A appears to be too "busy" with conflicting views between the open spaces in the beams.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C makes the best statement...A only will make a statement at night and B to me is a dud.
 1 (0%)  
 ?????
 1 (0%)  
 The small arch in Bridge C is an attempt at iconic visual statement. But it looks too small and flimsy, like a McDonald’s “McBridge,” and pales in comparison to the magnificent structural arch of the nearby Detroit-Superior Bridge. See http://www.flickr.com/photos/26992926@N08/2598486973/ Many other cities have iconic bridges. Best to either go all the way with such a statement, or not at all.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has some interesting features, which Bridge B seems devoid of. Bridge C makes a statement.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is exciting, and expresses confidence in the future. Frankly I find the other two selections to be bland and non-descript.
 1 (0%)  
 b and c really make no statement but blah
 1 (0%)  
 C is the only one that really stands out and says something about our city and how we see ourselves. I actually would like to see higher cables.
 1 (0%)  
 This criteria: create a visual image or statement, seems to be in opposition to the criteria: reflect consistent design themes of existing bridges. What I love about our bridges is that they have special stories behind them making each one different. Let's strive for something that says "wow!" and makes us eager to drive across the bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 C all the way!!
 1 (0%)  
 As stated above neither design creates a visual statement or image.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge a says Cleveland to me. bridge b says Houston and bridge c says Toledo
 1 (0%)  
 I think all designs are very sharp, but the arches make a statement of importance.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges "A" and "B" seem to blend in to neighboring bridges, Bridge "C" stands out and says "Look at me!" Bridge "C" would look better when properly lit at night...
 1 (0%)  
 The arches are fantastic.
 1 (0%)  
 "create a visual...." to me the most visually stimulating is Option C--think it's my Aquarius sign!!!!!
 1 (0%)  
 To me C is the only bridge that creates a visual statement. It is really the only bridge of the three that you would notice in a camera shot during a nationally televised event like a Cavs game.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is striking in two ways: it is unique to Cleveland, but not to other areas of the US/world, and it is strikingly out of place. It certainly creates a statement. Bridge B does not create a visual statement, at least based on the renderings available. Bridge C would have a "cool" factor, but I think it would look trendy as opposed to attractive and classy that I think Bridge A would provide 50 years from now.
 1 (0%)  
 Just seeing and viewing the rendering of Bridge A, I felt like I was already driving into to work or even to Game 7 the 2018 World Series where our Cleveland Indians just defeated the Chicago Cubs!!
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A best reflects this concept while also paying homage to the valley below. Key design element...great visual!
 1 (0%)  
 I still like A.
 1 (0%)  
 Again, Bridge A offers a dramatic distinct look with it's triangle shaped metal arches. Bridge B & C look like a straight line which is why a lot of us will say that it looks 'boring' for that very reason. Straight lines are boring.
 1 (0%)  
 What a beautiful design for our port and the great lakes .
 1 (0%)  
 n/a
 1 (0%)  
 The design of bridge C is the start of something visual that the city of Cleveland needs asap
 1 (0%)  
 Arches are completely different and give the impression of lightness and strength
 1 (0%)  
 No statements are made to my senses. My immediate reaction is all about questions: How did we get to this point? Why are we even involved if this is a lowest bid affair? Who is the sad lawyer who drives a Camry who wrote the criteria?
 1 (0%)  
 None of them make much of a statement. B and C make inapproprate statements, for what statements they make.
 1 (0%)  
 I wish the bridge had even more detail - but I guess that is just too expensive.
 1 (0%)  
 NONE and I repeat NONE of these designs create a visual statement. When crossing a bridge there are 2 ways to experience the designs. from below the bridge and on the bridge. all of these designs are only a unique experience when you are BELOW the bridge. driving this bridge would not create a statement what so ever!
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges B and C make no statement across the valley.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A at night does make a statement and blends well with one of our existing bridges when also illuminated. However, all 3 bridges are too simplistic and too reminiscent of typical overpasses to truly make a statement during the day.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is unique because everyone will get an impression of Cleveland while driving over. Few will have a side view or take the time to get one. I've travelled extensively and the bridges I remember are the ones whose feature element is visible from the road surface.
 1 (0%)  
 Only Bridge C does this with its arch, but I wish the arch was more in the middle of the structure or repeated elsewhere. It should be if it is structurally possible. My only concern is that the arch is right near Progressive Field, and might get lost in the general skyline than if it were more central or on the west end of the bridge instead of the east.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A and B create no such statement. Face it, the vast majority of people seeing the bridge will be ON the bridge, nt under it or looking at it from a distance. As a result, what you see while driving across it will have the biggest impact on visual perception. Bridges A and C are simply [bland] bridges from this perspective... much like any of a thousand other interstate bridges you might cross. Consider: Why is the Sydney Harbor Bridge, Brooklyn Bridge or the Golden Gate Bridge so well known? Because they are stunning to look at - they are visibly different. Who ever says "Wow, that bridge over Meander Resevoir (I-80) or Chatauqua Lake (I-86) looks awesome"?? obody! Why? Because they are plain and unassuming to drive over. Boring!
 1 (0%)  
 "C" makes the appropriate statement.
 1 (0%)  
 we need something new to help revitalize Cleveland's look
 1 (0%)  
 B is too plain, A is better with the underneath lighting, C grabs your eye.
 1 (0%)  
 I see no statements being made here, except in Bridge C. But why does just a small portion get the arches?
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is a bold statement. It will be a fresh look for the city of Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Cleveland needs a statement. I can't imagine send postcards to friends out of town. All designs are very ho-hum. We need something that says: "wow" great bridge, great city. I am very disappointed.
 1 (0%)  
 I want to feel as great at NYC, Chicago, LA, etc. A magnificent bridge will hold that together for the casinos, medical mart, convection center that brings plenty of folks to Cleveland. This is 2 arms hugging visitors.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A's visual statement: We like triangles. Bridge B's visual statement: We like straight lines. Bridge C's visual statement: We're moving forward, but we're looking back... to the St. Louis arch. The visual statement none of these bridges make but should: We understand the Cleveland architecture, we're looking to Cleveland's future, we're adding to that future.
 1 (0%)  
 For me, Bridge A is not interesting. The bridge design seems to disappears and blend in too much. The simple Sci-fi design tends to lead one into Cleveland as a place that is uneventful, with nothing going on and nothing to do.
 1 (0%)  
 This is incredibly important. Cleveland needs more eye-drawing features on its skyline. The city lacks a large number of distinctive symbols.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has a beautiful visual design - but not a strong "statement". Bridge B has no statement - so is that the statement? I don't think most people will appreciate that. Bridge C makes the most dramatic statement due to the arches above the road-deck. But I'm still confused about where they would be?
 1 (0%)  
 The arches difinitely create a new visial image.
 1 (0%)  
 See my previous comments above.
 1 (0%)  
 Again - A provides a stunning image across the span, while C is one-sided and B is devoid of imagery
 1 (0%)  
 The above 'ground' arch work appears to have the most interest. Same reponse as A.
 1 (0%)  
 The computer rendering of Bridge A has been done the best.
 1 (0%)  
 None of the bridges create a dramatic visual image or statement. Of the three A&C seem to most closely fit the criteria. Bridge B provides no statement.
 1 (0%)  
  Should create image that cleveland is smart and long term $$ wise
 1 (0%)  
 The Design of Bridge A stands alone in making a svisual statement in a positive way. The other two look outdated in comparison.
 1 (0%)  
 Nothing dramatic here to get excited about. Just hum drum.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C makes a strong statement that is compatible with that of the rock-n-roll hall of fame. It is modern and sleek and symbolizes what the future of cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 It's no contest here. Bridge A and Bridge B give you nothing close to a visual image or statement, unless that statement is "look at how bland I am".
 1 (0%)  
 No real visual statements with design A or B, design C does'nt go far enough.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A and B I feel do this equally well. If Bridge B just continued the big arch above the superstructure, it would have differentiated itself.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is a boring monotonous span, bridge C has some visual interest, but bridge A is by far the most pleasing.
 1 (0%)  
 The cable arch is a stronger visual image, but the open beam spans are consistent throughout the bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Again "A" is more ascetically pleasing, but function is paramount.
 1 (0%)  
 I prefer Bridge C.
 2 (0%) 
 
 they all 3 make a visual statement, but Bridge A does it best
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A makes a real statement. All Clevelander's would be proud of the finished product.
 1 (0%)  
 The bridge should represent a road into Cleveland's future. It should offer a glimpse as too where we as a city are going. Bridge C accomplishes that hands down.
 1 (0%)  
 We all know C for me. It expresses creative and architecture. Bridge B is boring and doesnt express anything creative. It is boring and if you ask me it looks to be as an eye sore. Don't cities try to avoid eye sores??
 1 (0%)  
 A reminds me of the waves on Erie. B and C are boring
 1 (0%)  
  A&B. Look plain. Just a modern verse of the main ave. bridge. C. Is a visual statement.
 1 (0%)  
 A reflects a clean, modern, fast moving city B although modern, has little character for Cleveland who has a volume of character C is out of character
 1 (0%)  
 bridge C is too futuristic. Bridge A provides a good balance.
 1 (0%)  
 The cables on Choice C are like great sturdy arms welcoming one into a city filled with character and future promise that is positivity Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Visually capturing the attention of visitors or fellow residents should be the "awe" factor not....WOW....what it that....that looks horrible...too much even.
 1 (0%)  
 The arch span in Bridge C is in a perfect location - in the Gateway District - gives the area a sense of newness and motion. This is what people who visit our city will see as they explore Progressive Field, the Q, and West 4th Street - the most impressive parts of the other bridges will be underneath the pavement and not visible.
 1 (0%)  
 Hardly a visual statement made at all. Quite boring, predictable, and disappointing.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is too plain, boring I like C
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B makes no statement; it's merely another bridge, like all the ones we already have. Bridge A would look pretty nice new, but as the years passed, it would just be another bridge. Bridge C, however, makes a statement and would continue to for years to come.
 1 (0%)  
 What visual image or statement were you attempting to communicate? Simplicity? Dull? Mundane? Uninspiring? If so, you've succeeded. I must be missing something here.
 1 (0%)  
 Unless your visual statement is "we can't afford to build architectural and technological advanced bridges".
 1 (0%)  
 The statement you'll achieve is BORING! Here is a wonderful opportunity for Cleveland to step up and join the other cities that have allowed for wonderful bridge designs.
 1 (0%)  
 C is the most noticable; however, the arch is the most interesting thing. The rest of the bridge is boring.
 1 (0%)  
 The only people that would appreciate the visual of any of these disigns would be very visually impared.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A creates a unique visual image by using triangular steel supports and the lighting enhances the unique shape and design of the underside of the bridge. Both Bridges B & C have no character when viewed from the cuyahoga river.
 1 (0%)  
 A has nice visuals.
 1 (0%)  
 It is beauty that will catch people eye from any angle.
 1 (0%)  
 SInce the bridge is visible by virtually no one except those driving on it. None of them even come close to meeting this criteria. There is nothing about the surface. PERIOD!
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A doesn't just make a statement; it shouts "Look at me! I'm large and in charge!". It shows the industrial nature of Cleveland. Bridge B, with it's flowing nature speaks of the waters of Lake Erie, and seems to float. Bridge C doesn't say much except "Look, I got arches!".
 1 (0%)  
 B & C are dull, dull dull!
 1 (0%)  
 Theses designs couldn't be further from creating any visual image or statement, if anything, they seem to want to go unnoticed.
 1 (0%)  
 I like the open deck plan, but in order to maintain intergerty, there shoud be some design to draw the eye toward the cityscape.
 1 (0%)  
 LOOOOOOOkkkkkkk wha crossin OVER..ol tired factories,stone piles,*@* MT lots,etc.etc.SERIOUSLY...quite frankly HALF expect US corp of engin.to DIG out part of CURVES to EASE traffic whutever/silting...HALF expect MittalArcellor to turn HALF the mill INTO THIS NUCOR mini mill deal w/only a meltshop,cont.caster n say goodbye to OXYGEN furn HOTend part..
 1 (0%)  
 B makes almost no statement at all. C ids, initially the most eye catching, because of its above the road arches. A still catches the eye, yet invites closer study, then delivers.
 1 (0%)  
 The designers are all to be complimented - however Bridge C calls for "more" improvements ... it is a start to help resurrect Cleveland's environment - and bring a good pride back to where we live.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is too plain to create a visual statement.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is a memorable bridge with the design and it makes a statement in itself. Bridge B is kinda blah. Bridge C definitely strikes an image in one's mind, but I think people might say, "what in the world", more than anything.
 1 (0%)  
 "A" states- I am flimsy and might last 50 years. "B" states- If you like the 480 bridges, you'll like me. "C" states- bring more money to build it and lots of paint to keep it nice. Unless those arches are made of plastic, you'll be painting them all the time. I work in a structure in Downtown Cleveland with exposed steel beams. Its a constant battle to keep them painted.
 1 (0%)  
 Absolutely boring, all proposals.
 1 (0%)  
 C looks so Cool! It's my favorite!
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B lacks of the visual image. Bridge A may look nice from under and far end but not from above or near end.
 1 (0%)  
 all 3 miss this point by a mile. They cannot be more plain, plain, and plain. Very disappointing. All 3 should be thrown out and started over again.
 1 (0%)  
 A is best
 1 (0%)  
 C has the possibility to be iconic. B is a common, ugly bridge design. A is only a small step up.
 1 (0%)  
 A's visual statement is incomplete, rework the above deck so it has more character and can interact with the buildings of the cityscape and then increase the sculpting of the pillars below the round openings of steel so they tell a little more of a story. B and C dont work visually.
 1 (0%)  
 Design C creates an exciting visual statement
 1 (0%)  
 best of the 3 ~ wish it were more dramatic like the new bridge in toledo
 1 (0%)  
 All three make a statement, I just dont like what design C has to say
 1 (0%)  
 The only statement they make is that Northeast Ohio is someplace to pass through because we lake any creativity.
 1 (0%)  
 If the visual statement is "this is a bridge", they all meet the criteria. I think A provides the best visual image.
 1 (0%)  
 C wins here with the arches
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A appears to be a reflection on history. Bridge B has no character. Bridge C has an overstated design.
 1 (0%)  
 Only C does and barely
 1 (0%)  
 The trusses of design A make a statement as do the arches of design C. Design B is just plain boring.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B sucks my ass.
 1 (0%)  
 I believe that form should follow function. Bridges A and B certainly don't " maximize " the possibility to create a visual image or statement, but I don't know ( number 2 ) that bridge C meets the criteria of " maximizing " the possibility. It makes a half hearted, juvenile attempt to " put lipstick on a pig ".
 1 (0%)  
 C is the best at this.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C definitely makes a statement, are those gas pipe arches?
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C will be a city momument
 1 (0%)  
 C looks awesome, and A looks pretty cool. B is boring.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A and B simply say "hello," or "you're here." Bridge C says "Welcome."
 1 (0%)  
 If this were being built before Boston's suspension bridge then I would be all for Bridge C....but we are Cleveland and once again late to the party. We should take Bridge A and put a little more flare into it. Bridge B would have been cutting edge if it were built in 1950 not 2010.
 1 (0%)  
 DULL AND BORING!!!!!!!!!!
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is not unique and will not catch the eyes of Ohioans.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B would offer no change
 1 (0%)  
 People will remember the arches of Bridge C, even though they are small relative to the entire length of the bridge. No one will be taking any pictures of Bridges A or B.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A&B look like the boring ,uncreative ,old bridges as described in the explanation for question D. Bridge C looks like a exciting ,creative, new brigde as described in the explanation for question D.
 1 (0%)  
 I agree with this.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C creates the most visual impact with the arches by the Gateway area.
 1 (0%)  
 THE BRIDGE SUPPORTS GIVE IT STRENGTH AND FLUID MOTION THROUGH OUT ITS ENTIRE LENGTH.
 1 (0%)  
 C IS A STATEMENT
 1 (0%)  
 Yes, the statement the bridge design should make should go something like this.... "We are not afraid of change. We are not afraid of being different. We are (giving our best shot) to be the best." and "Look at us, we have the most high-tech, coolest bridge ever built, ha ha ha."
 1 (0%)  
 There is no statement in any of these designs other than "Who cares?"
 1 (0%)  
 As an amateur photographer, Bridge C speaks to me visually. I can already visualize images I would like to capture. Bridges A & B does not evoke the same desire to whip out the camera and shoot away.
 1 (0%)  
 B is the worst
 1 (0%)  
 a & b are so normal that they blend in to the point that one might not even know they are ON a bridge. c makes a clear statement and screams, "you're on a NEW bridge - take notice!".
 1 (0%)  
 Simply a failure.
 1 (0%)  
 You'll remember your 'drive' on Bridge C most but everyday for every second you'll remember Bridge A when you are looking at it, not driving on it.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is the most maximizing to me
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C only meets again because it is flawed in that the masterpiece is only over broadway and not the valley as shown in the renderings the span over the valley remains to be a regular concrete on Steel flat span.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A and B look just like any other. Unless there is something I am missing Bridge C is visually the best.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is by far more visually appealing than A or B. Even though the other two bridges maintain the style of the valley, it is not an attractive look. They are there only to get the job done. Look at the Golden Gate Bridge or the Brooklyn Bridge. They are two of the landmarks you associate with their respective cities and they aren't just there to get the job done. Both are unique and monumental, inspiring awe and earning admiration for their design.
 1 (0%)  
 Boring, boring, boring
 1 (0%)  
 The statement they all make is boredom.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C has a great look and definitely speaks out in creativity. Bridge A & B are traditional and don't really stand out.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is classic and can be designed to also be innovative. I think that is the best statement of a classic American city. We have tradition and innovation. We are not flashy for the purpose of being flashy. We are strong, effective, and act with purpose. The visual statement created by Bridge A embodies these principles. Bridge B is more futuristic than innovative and Bridge C's suspension is flashy for the purpose of being flashy.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A and C make a statement that city is moving forward. Bridge B looks like the city is going backward.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A seems to create the best visiual image both night and day! Bridge C is a close second but not as visually appealing at night as it would be during the day.
 1 (0%)  
 C definitely stands out and makes a statement all around. A is only interesting from below. B is an eyesore.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B makes the statement that ODOT is too boring or stupid to hire a real design team.
 1 (0%)  
 A is an attractive, clean look. B is too basic, lacks personality C intrudes on the skyline, too loud
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A makes more of a statement at night than the other 2 bridges. Bridge B is again plain Jane and does not stand out. Bridge C is a striking statement in the day but sort of bland at night.
 1 (0%)  
 I believe Briidge C is very creative, the other two are pretty basic, and look like every other bridge in Cleveland. Brdige C is different, very innovative.
 1 (0%)  
 ONLY a MASSIVE ARCH can do this.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A exudes strength and stability, Bridge B looks like an ordinary structure, Bridge C is too dramatic.
 1 (0%)  
 Again only bridge C presents any visual difference. Although the design presented is shown with the power completely out in the City. So if power is turned off in downtown Cleveland every evening bridge C will look just like the pdf. rendering. Of course don't forget to turn off the streetlights on the bridge itself since they are not turned on in the fantasy rendering. Wonder how many Thousands were spent on these fantasy pdf's?
 2 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A has a very clean modern positive look.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C gives the city character. Love the night time view as well. BEAUTIFUL!
 1 (0%)  
 See comments on Question A.
 1 (0%)  
 See Comments for Question A
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C !!!!!! The cable arch design should be a landslide winner in this category. When I think of a visual impact or statement, I think of the landmarks that one might see during commercials of a Browns Monday Night Football game. Things that come to mind are the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame and Terminal Tower, Bridge C's cable arches lit up at night highlighting the gateway area would definitely make this sort of impact and create a new landmark for Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 It is a statement.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A creates a great visual image, especailly when it is lit up at night.
 1 (0%)  
 See previous answers
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C will definately inspire a second hard look! Bridge A would inspire a double-take but be quickly forgotten
 1 (0%)  
 i think it is streamline and makes that statement.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A = Timeless, Bridge B = invisible, Bridge C = MceeDees
 1 (0%)  
 See comments in A.
 1 (0%)  
 The support latice work of Design A will create some pleasing night /sun set photo.
 1 (0%)  
 I think Bridge C gives Cleveland an opportunity to create something very special and distinctive, emphasizing that Cleveland is not just a former smokestack city but a city moving ahead into a new era. Bridge C gives me that sense of forward motion. We should take this chance to create something special in a town which is crying out for that. Cleveland helped populaize the radical new music of Rock and Roll and its infrastructure design need not be cautious. The region must take chances, be distinctive and eschew the ordinary and plebian for a new world in the 21st Century. In short, Bridge C is just way cool, dudes, and needs to be part of the scene! It has it all over the others in this regard.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge design C is fantastic. We have an opportunity here to do something that is visually very interesting.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C makes a positive statement of progress and visually is the most appealing
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B looks like a never-ending pathway with no real design element. Both Bridge A&C have nice lines and interesting pieces for your eye to look at.
 1 (0%)  
 very eye appealing
 1 (0%)  
 the design is great
 1 (0%)  
 An opportunity lost in each design!
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C definitely makes the most powerful statement!
 1 (0%)  
 BRIDGE "A" PROVIDES A VISUAL STATEMENT THAT IS CLEAN, INTERESTING, AND MODERN.
 1 (0%)  
 You will remember this bridge. There is a similar bridge in florida and every time i go over it, it is amazing. i look at the structure while up close and look at the general design as we are approaching the bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 The lighting on A, shoud it truly look like that at night, makes a wonderful visual image. C seems to be the visual statement least dependent on angle and time of day while reminding me off sails, a simple nod to Lake Erie. Bridge B has interesting foundations, but has to be too closely looked at to create an overall visual image/statement.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A in the day looks awesome but lit at night over the River, WOW!!!
 1 (0%)  
 I think it add an impact to the city with out being too overt
 1 (0%)  
 The Cable Arch on Bridge "C" appears to be no more than a "bauble" that is only a couple of hundred feet long with no real necessity to being integral to the support of the bridge. The rest of the bridge, "C", is just like "B": boring with no design.
 1 (0%)  
 They all create an image or statement, however Bridges A and B create a smooth outstanding statement that blends with the skyline and all point views.
 1 (0%)  
 Love it!
 1 (0%)  
 "A" looks like cleveland, the others "B" like LA and who knows where "C" came from
 1 (0%)  
 looking at the bridge (A) it looks strong, classy looking and I think a lot of people would be proud to have bridge (A)
 1 (0%)  
 Both A & C have the potential to captivate photographers and artists.
 1 (0%)  
 It holds the WOW factor
 1 (0%)  
 I pulled up the pictures of all three bridges but only A made me say WOW and I really want to see that one.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A definately maximizes the possibility to create a visual image because the bridge is designed to capture the eye of the people.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B has no statement. Bridge a has beautiful details underneath, which is the most visable area.
 1 (0%)  
 These 3 designs do not create a statement - they seem old fashioned and very boring.
 1 (0%)  
 These are not interesting or attractive bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 The visual statement made by each is "We played it safe."
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C arch definitely creates a statement. Whether that is the statement desired is another matter the sightlines created by Bridge A provides better view of skyline Bridge B brings to mind rust belt urban environment
 1 (0%)  
 The design of Bridge C has a striking profile view, but maximizes view while driving on the structure. I would be impressed while driving across this design. The other designs would look like a road with concrete barriers on each side - kind of plain.
 1 (0%)  
 See first comment. These are boring designs - especially for the price tag involved.
 1 (0%)  
 B is boring and plain, C is too much of a contrast of the existing area structures.
 1 (0%)  
 What a disappointment. None of these bridges is even remotely visually interesting.
 1 (0%)  
 I do not think any of these really make a statement other than industrial funcionality and simplicity.
 1 (0%)  
 Ditto.
 1 (0%)  
 I'm not sure any of these bridges make a statement except that ODOT failed to put enough emphasis on design. It's clear that with 30% allocation on design, these teams felt too constrained to allow a great project reach its potential.
 1 (0%)  
 see above
 1 (0%)  
 Both bridge A&B are nothing that make statements. Bridge C is something new in innovative and if the tax payers are going to spend $450 million dollars. It should be new, modern and aestheticly pleasing.
 1 (0%)  
 Taken as a whole, none of these designs is truly memorable.
 1 (0%)  
 Since this bridge will be a major part of Cleveland's skyline, I think it should have a signature appeal to it.
 1 (0%)  
 The statement Bridge A reflects is that Cleveland is a modern city with rich history
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C creates the visual images similar to those you'd see in Boston, MA; Charleston, SC and even Monterrey, Mexico
 1 (0%)  
 C: Good visual. It will become a landmark at night and during the day.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is creative and attractive.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A & B don't really add anything new to the landscape, but the arched cable stay does.
 1 (0%)  
 See comments above, and Steven Litts comments. At least Bridge A provides some minimal visual adornment through the use of triangular supports and under-deck lighting, but it could go much further with this lighting/adornment concept.
 1 (0%)  
 Both A and C have a strong visual image; however, i like a clear view of the city without any rods and beams in the way....Bridge A would be my first choice.
 1 (0%)  
 Cleveland needs to be considered as a growing industry and the overall visual aspect coming to our town should be inviting and exciting as you draw near.
 1 (0%)  
 Arch span says it all
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is the only one that is a statement, and different for the city.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge 1 is better and more pleasing to the eye than number 2. However, nothing is quite like a suspension bridge to catch the eye. It is a big, powerful, very nice visual addition to the Cleveland area.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is the only Bridge that gives you something to see as you drive over it. The other 2's detail is on the bottom and since the public isn't down there it's a waste.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C resembles a skeletal pierogi. Now this represents what Cleveland is all about!
 1 (0%)  
 as mentioned above, bridge c stands out and will be recognized by all who visit cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B just looks like a bridge; A & C have more dimension and looks.
 1 (0%)  
 It looks like the image is one that's moving toward the future.
 1 (0%)  
 Would be seen for miles
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C reflects a modern image of downtown Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has a strong visual image the projects a statement that will lift the city into the future.
 1 (0%)  
 That statement is obvious
 1 (0%)  
 C has the most visual image and statement.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C leaves a very lasting impression. I would think that people who do not frequent the city would have a lasting image of this bridge as a landmark for the city.
 1 (0%)  
 NONE of the proposals demonstrate a clear visual statement with a degree of uniqueness. What makes this bridge memorable? Nothing. What associates this bridge with Cleveland other than any other bridge? Nothing.
 1 (0%)  
 Another bullshit question. All three bridges "maximize the ability to create a visual image or statement". Two of them, however, are ugly and boring. Bridge A is the least offensive and actually provides a functional structure with an understated elegance.
 1 (0%)  
 The suspension bridge definitley provides a visual statement that the other 2 options do not. Who wouldn't want to use that as a picture background?
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C comes close, but not far enough
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C provides the best visual theme, as stated before easy can become a landmark for Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Both A and B designs help to create a visual image by opening up the skyline without encroaching on it . Bridge C draws the eye to the bridge itself and away from the city and the valley.
 1 (0%)  
 Love image of C (St. Louis Arch look) Like C Feel no visual appeal in B
 1 (0%)  
 I feel Bridge C does create a visual image/statement.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A makes a positive visual image.
 1 (0%)  
 this is the only bridge that stands out visually, and has the only design element that the driver can see.
 1 (0%)  
 Again, are you kidding?
 1 (0%)  
 It just stands out!
 1 (0%)  
 B is hardly noticeable as a statement, A is average in its statement, while C creates a statement the others lack.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A will be a beautiful structure. Bridge B is uninspiring. Bridge C makes a statement "Not in Cleveland".
 1 (0%)  
 They are cookie cutter designs.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is consistent across the board, the visual image of the steel superstructure is how Cleveland started with the Steel mills and shows we have not forgotten the history and heritage of Cleveland and its tie to the Steel Industry as the baseball stadium shows its steel work.
 1 (0%)  
 All three bridge designs rest on straight formed concrete pilasters, and there is a lack of organic flow or visual connection between the bridge deck and the pilasters. This is in my mind a primary reason why the designs do not fulfill this criterion of maximizing the possibility to create a visual image or statement.
 1 (0%)  
 The brideg if plan C is chosen has the opportunity to be the most unique bridge crossing of the Cuyahoga just like the Detroit-Superior bridge and the Carnegie-Lorain bridge is too.
 1 (0%)  
 If one were to drive past A or B, they likely wouldn't even notice. Only C makes any statement.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C makes a statement to residents and visitors to Cleveland with it's impressive design. The others would simply blend in as normal bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 Love the night lighting
 1 (0%)  
 C is a sharp bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A makes a visual statement and so does Bridge C. Bridge B is not that visually interesting.
 1 (0%)  
 These are dull and unimaginative designs. The visual statement is "dull and boring" These designs look like slightly modified highway overpass bridges found all across the USA. These 3 dull designs look like the thousands of other highway overpasses in the US - These designs look like they could come from an overpass in Montana or Nevada or Mississippis or Delaware or Arkansas or any other place since there is style to these designs. There is little that is unique about these unimaginative designs. There is "no design in these designs"; just elongated highway overpasses. Depressingly dull designs which will haunt the entryway to downtown Cleveland for the next 50 years
 1 (0%)  
 None really make a statement.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is the best visual by far!
 1 (0%)  
 B & C look like every other highway brigde I have seen (with the exception of the arch over Ontario). A is a bit more interesting - just a bit.
 1 (0%)  
 Particularly when lit at night, Bridge A steals the show.
 1 (0%)  
 Note even close - total failure on the part of ODOT
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is kind of boring from a visual image standpoint
 1 (0%)  
 Love the design of bridge A, It has exceeded at making at statement.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge c is the best
 1 (0%)  
 B is amazingly bad--unless the goal was to make a statement of being mundane and stale. A has minimal impact since it is so imitative. C creates some visual image and will certainly provide a better experience of place.
 1 (0%)  
 Was this even considered when the designs were chosen?
 1 (0%)  
 Design C has a wow factor to associate a single bridge with Cleveland, Ohio.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A looks like it would be interesting from below -- and lighting it at night could be rather impressive. However, for those who travel on it, rather bland -- just another interstate bridge. Sure hope we can do better then reproduce the infamous I-480 bridge over the valley.
 1 (0%)  
 All designs reflect the criteria, although B & C's statement do not match the surrounding area or Cleveland in general.
 1 (0%)  
 I think it would add a nice appeal to the area. Has a very updated look.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge b is very boring, cold, and does not contribute to the visual image of cleveland
 1 (0%)  
 All three are generally boring and ordinary.
 1 (0%)  
 Excellent design, beautiful and functional.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge Design C is spacious
 1 (0%)  
 The visual image/statement illustrated with Design A is unique and not generic like the other two designs.
 1 (0%)  
 The above deck arch is eye catching.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A reflects a modern and vibrant statement for Cleveland as a city that will be a key player in the future. It is a city that is on it's way in growth and possibilities and I believe this bridge demonstrates this in a way that the other two do not.
 1 (0%)  
 Not sure what you do with the arches of C when the adjacent bridge is constructed.
 1 (0%)  
 I especially like the night visual of Bridge A. I do not like Bridge C's visual at all. As stated before, I do not like the visual of a cable Bridge at all.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A definitely makes a striking visual image with the open beam design, it is both elegant and daring at the same time. However, despite the renderings in the design that show people walking and rowing beneath the span, I know that this area is mostly industrial, and people will not be able to appreciate the hard work and beauty of the span Bridge B tries to make its statement in the sleekness of the bridge deck design, and I believe that it does so, but in no way does it exceed any expectations Bridge C while the designs of the viaduct are not that much different from Bridge B that merely meets criteria, I feel that the Cable Suspended arch creates a fantastic visual image and statement by itself, and it is placed in such an area that almost anyone that enters Cleveland will be able to appreciate it.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A creates a visual statement throughout in both day and night. Bridge B attempts to be invisible while Bridge C is only visually creative in 5% of the structure.
 1 (0%)  
 The image is breathtaking!
 1 (0%)  
 How could anyone consider any of these designs remarkable in any way.
 1 (0%)  
 The statement each bridge makes is that Cleveland is boring and substandard. But I don't believe that Cleveland is boring OR substandard. We deserve far better design.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is more pleasing to the eye
 1 (0%)  
 see A
 1 (0%)  
 Who needs a statement?? Remember when we built the new baseball stadium..well that was a statement. Sold out for years and now is an empty dinosaur. Designs fade fast but a well constructed bridge will not. B tops the chart from an engineering perspective and I am guessing will be less $$. If so go with the best for less and use the $$ saved for more ODOT work! Or does this make to much sense as we seek an identity that does/will not exist.
 1 (0%)  
 after looking at these designs, i just assume take my chances and drive over the current unsafe bridge. that is how much of a visual statement these new designs bring to the table and the citizens of cleveland
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge c says it welcome to cleveland. It doesn't try to look like the old innerbelt, it says I'm the new innerbelt bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge "A" creates a beautiful skyline
 1 (0%)  
 The architecture of this design is definitely a visual statement.
 1 (0%)  
 here is the statement of each _________^________ or __________v___________ or ____________n____________. did we really pay $$$$$ to an architect???
 1 (0%)  
 Cleveland is desperate for a signature bridge. Bridge #3 is a start.
 1 (0%)  
  I like the unique design
 1 (0%)  
 C would make a statement. Not sure it would be a good statement. I think C looks nice, but just out of character for the area.
 1 (0%)  
 Just like San Francisco has the Golden Gate bridge, this image would give an identification to Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 I believe the sub-level arches of Bridge A are visually very appealing. Without being too radical and noticeable, they are subtle but strong in their statement of design.
 1 (0%)  
 Yes, the designs should have maximized a visual image or statement. But they don't; they are infact quite mundane.
 1 (0%)  
 As I said before, I always felt the present bridge was just a concrete ribbon. All of these images are very appealing, but I cannot see anything to make Bridge C cohesive with the present architecture, and Bridge B reminds me once again of a concrete ribbon, flat, stark and no imagination.
 1 (0%)  
 A makes a little statement, while the others are mutes.
 1 (0%)  
 No visual interest has been captivated by any of the designs.
 1 (0%)  
 None of the designs "maximizes" the possibility to create a visual image or statement. they isntead look like plain highways. Boston and Providence, R. I. and even New Haven, CT recently created similar structures but more distinctive and innovative.
 1 (0%)  
 Aside from being visible, none of these bridges provides a true statement.
 1 (0%)  
 C looks cool, but I'm confused. Why don't the arches appear in all renderings. Are they invisible from a certain angle or something or are they an "extra"?
 1 (0%)  
 Visual statements are secondary to economic design, motorist safety and ease of maintenance.
 1 (0%)  
 nothing exciting from bridge b
 1 (0%)  
 The bridges make only a statement that ODOT is not particularly interested in architecture in cities.
 1 (0%)  
 A is the only one that does this, hands down!
 1 (0%)  
 The arches on A will only be seen from the flats - and are no value. B is a standard bridge. Boring.
 1 (0%)  
 Design A is the only design that makes a unique statement throughout the entire structure.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge a looks like it should be there
 1 (0%)  
 How does only one option have anything that can be seen by the drivers of the actual highway? There is NO visual statement, especially for bridge B
 1 (0%)  
 BRIDGE A DISPLAYS THE PROPER VISUAL IMAGE, AS WELL AS MAKING A SOLID STATEMENT AS TO BEAUTY.
 1 (0%)  
 Your criteria all talk of in essence an iconic bridge if you got what they imply. what you have is a cookie cutter bridge out bridge design 101.
 1 (0%)  
 The statement is that ODOT is incompetent
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A maximizes the possibility to create a visual image or statement in a more coherent fashion than Bridge B and C.
 1 (0%)  
 See comments A-D....Bridge A far exceeds the expectation and provides a great ride into the city. Bridge B is too simple and does not bring much character for what is asked of.
 1 (0%)  
 If these 2 choices are O.D.O.T.'s idea of FUTURISTIC and FORWARD thinking,"SLOWHIO" will never be at the forefront of the national conscience.
 1 (0%)  
 There are really too many voting criteria on this form. The questions are so similar this is no real way to differentiate. I'm voting for bridge A.
 1 (0%)  
 While C may create a visual image - being so small, is it actually weight-bearing? and the statement for C - will it be that Cleveland 'tried' to be modern?
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is the definite choice to create a strong visual image and statement.
 1 (0%)  
 B is too lightweight. A and C show more "muscle" in their design.
 1 (0%)  
 the usual
 1 (0%)  
 Open undercarriage offers lighting opportunities and will aid in allowing north winds flow through spans
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge c gives an interesting look to te valley area
 1 (0%)  
 To the extent that the image is "Cleveland: A Great Place to Be From," then you, ODOT, have succeeded. The image here, especially with Bridge B, is that we are neither imaginative nor creative. Or, the message may be that ODOT prefers to spend its money on things like Columbus or sound walls. It's like a choose-your-own-adventure book!
 1 (0%)  
Total: 418

13. F. Bridge design should focus on principles of form, rhythm and scale. The scale of bridge elements should invoke and be in proper proportion with the dimensions of the overall valley.

How well does each design reflect the above criteria?

  
Does not meet Criteria
Meets Criteria
Exceeds Criteria
(%)1212241636
Bridge A
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
 12345
(%)34253272
Bridge B
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
 12345
(%)2215221328
Bridge C
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
12345
Total: 1351

14. Please provide further explanation or comments regarding your selections for Question F

 One of the main reasons that I like bridge A's design is because of it's symmetrical scaling.
 1 (0%) 
 
  
 1 (0%) 
 
 Hard to tell
 1 (0%) 
 
 The arches on bridge C do not look proportioned to the rest of the bridge.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C has all of these criteria from above comments already made.  I'm not really sure about either A or B.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A fits into the rhythm of the area. Its design feels natural and fits the dimensions of the valley. Bridge B and C's spans feel unnatural and bland. Of B and C, Bridge B's supports feel more natural than C's.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Totally agree with statement F.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A provides some semblance of form and rhythm. The scale of each bridge seems acceptable. Bridges B doesn't seem to invoke any feeling of form or rhythm. Bridge C's cable arch is appealing, but the rest of the bridge is uninspired.
 1 (0%) 
 
 It looks like a child took some blocks and set them up for piers and than laid some boards across for the deck.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C doesn't fit in then...the arched area above the bridge competes with the skyline and Progressive Field instead of accenting it.  Bridges B and A accent the skyline and Progressive Field...unfortunately Bridge B is too boring.
 1 (0%) 
 
 THE A AND B DESIGNS ARE TOO FLASHY FOR THE AREA, IN MY OPINION.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The rythem of the design could well acept a break over the river where the reguired vertical clearnace is the the greatest.  An arch or a staid girder section would be a welcome change over the repetitive spans approaching the river span.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A does seem to fit the idea that form follows function ... it's a strong, muscular design, that suggests a flow, like waves, which is appropriate for a bridge that is supposed to help traffic "flow" through Cleveland.
 1 (0%) 
 
 All Bridges meet this criteria.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The proportion of the steel on A is wrong, B again should just be thrown out, and C has bad rhythym, but a good concept.
 1 (0%) 
 
 They're singing a one note song.
 1 (0%) 
 
 See other comments
 1 (0%) 
 
 All of the choices seem to meet the design principles
 1 (0%) 
 
 All are fine re: scale. 
 1 (0%) 
 
 The main spans of B and C are too plain and 'thin' A has a nice look to it...it just looks more substantial.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I'll leave that to the experts.
 1 (0%) 
 
 As I stated above, the valley doesn't have a single dominating feature, since the river is a relatively narrow part of the expanse. All three designs reflect this. However, design C's arches create an impact as drivers enter the downtown area. To me, this is the rhythm one wants to create.
 1 (0%) 
 
 With its simple lines, Bridge B spans the valley without overwhelming it.
 1 (0%) 
 
 They're fine.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Arches in Bridge C don't belong.
 1 (0%) 
 
 No comment.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C has a fresh appearance, not what Cleveland is. We need fresh designs to make Cleveland stand out, not look the same as it always has.
 1 (0%) 
 
 All of the bridges seem to be scaled nicely and meet the demand of the people and the environment.
 1 (0%) 
 
 As much as design C makes a statement, I have reservations about how the scale, form, etc will fit in with the rest of the valley. I believe design A to be a much better fit overall.
 1 (0%) 
 
 All meet this but Bridge C is perhaps over the top.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A meets these criteria. Bridge B has no form or rhythm to it, or if it does it is lost in the scale. Bridge C lacks rhythm and scale as well, with no unique design out over the valley and then a different design at the end over the city.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C seems to overpower.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Rhythm is steady in B and C, but horrifically boring.
 1 (0%) 
 
 What form does B+C have other than a flat road deck accross the valley?
 1 (0%) 
 
 There is nothing special about the scale of Bridges A and B. Bridge C gives off a vibe of an impressive span over an impressive valley.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Not sure why I think A is the best fit for this criteria.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A would match the rhythm of the valley in a perfect marriage of harmony. It's quite stunning and well thought out when considering the maximum potential of the valley.
 1 (0%) 
 
 no comment
 3 (1%) 
 
 Bridge C arches mimic the look of a valley ...
 1 (0%) 
 
 While A and C are balanced designs this bridge would pale in comparison to the bridges that we currently have based on design concepts
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C is a little to big for me with the giant poles and cables above.
 1 (0%) 
 
 B is blah. A is OK. C is outstanding (it was the one chosen for the Plain Dealer's featured photo)
 1 (0%) 
 
 Non of the bridges are creative enough to not meet this criteria.
 1 (0%) 
 
 They all pretty much do that.
 1 (0%) 
 
 B and A will just blend in as another valley eyesore (I guess that would meet criteria, but I'm taking off points for general principle). The vally is big enoug to handle the scale of C, but it is still striking and will stand out (not a bad thing)
 1 (0%) 
 
 The three concepts are almost direct replicas of the existing bridge profile. How aabou this - WE have a valley right, why not reflect that dip in landscape with the opposite arc above steet level grade. This would mimic nature, help the skyline, and add the visual appeal that would be seen from every angle of our great city. Color will be important as well.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C - in my travels have found the arches to be unattractive and distracting
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A offers consistency across its entire span and offers interest from any point of view. Bridge B is simply too, well... simple and doesn't evoke much excitement. Bridge C would have a "Feature" whereas the rest of the bridge is quite dull.
 1 (0%) 
 
 honestly I'm not sure about this question all of the bridges seem to fit with the overall dimention of the valley.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The columns on Bridge B are taller and more delicate then on the others which gives a better sense of scale.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I think they all meet this criteria, only C exceeds it highly.
 1 (0%) 
 
 exactly
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge B appears too skinny and unimportant
 1 (0%) 
 
 you have to be careful because progressive field is in the back ground
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A exceeds the look and consistency of other bridges plus a new world look, Bridge C adds a visual arches to add form, rhythm, and scale that sticks out, and Bridge B seems to be ordinary and standard.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Open beams look to scale on bridge A.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A design shows some thought went into it. Not just road and columns.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The scale is dramatic for the span it will go over a form not seen in the Cleveland area in history
 1 (0%) 
 
 blidge (a) will be in excellent proper dimension accross the valley.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A is very consistent in its design. It doesn't overpower the landscape; it seems to enhance it through its clean lines. Bridge B is a very clean design that meets the criteria very well. It doesn't overpower the landscape, it enhances it. Bridge C meets the criteria with its clean design and limited structural presence.
 1 (0%) 
 
 No comment
 1 (0%) 
 
 My selections says it all
 1 (0%) 
 
 ????????????????
 1 (0%) 
 
 Only Bridge A captures all three - form, rhythm, and scale. Bridge B looks too thin and plain in comparison with the city structure and scale. The size of the arch in Bridge C is too small for nearby Progressive Field.
 1 (0%) 
 
 bridge a really focuses on the scale, form and rhythm of the valley and fills the space with comfort. bridge b runs away from the space. bridge c overcomes the area
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridges "A" and "B" seem to be fully functional, but not quite as pleasing to the eye as bridge "C"....
 1 (0%) 
 
 The rhythm from bridge C seems abruptly interrupted by the cable spans near the ballpark. They definitely have a "cool" factor, but they're not rhythmic. Bridge B meets those requirements, but only in its "cut from a mold" appearance.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A answer all of your questions topics is have a gracefully forms and rythm and its scale is perfect not to low nor high..jsut PERFECT!!
 1 (0%) 
 
 From below bridge C doesn't appear any different from existing local bridges built in the past 30 years.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I don't know how they did it, but Bridge A design looks 'shorter' than the other two designs because of the lower height concrete pillars. Meaning, it seems to hang lower to the ground than the other two designs. Really a neat design trick.
 1 (0%) 
 
 They are all great , but this has that extra quality of form .
 1 (0%) 
 
 n/a
 2 (1%) 
 
 Form I will give you as it appears that vehicles will be able to pass over the top. Rhythm? No, unless you count mind numbing repetition. Scale? None appropriate to the majesty of the valley - oh it is there you have to look. You have to look past the lowest cost bid mechanism that has ruined this process
 1 (0%) 
 
 This criteria invites basic designs. It might have been more interesting if this criteria were simply omitted. Notably negative in this way, the wire sling on C just doesnt look right butted up against Progressive Field. It produces visual clutter. Some place else, it might have worked much better.
 1 (0%) 
 
 could not tell on C design.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A exudes rhythem and scale.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The proportions are spot on.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C is clean with some flare in the pillars. Bridge B is just another bridge without being offensive. Bridge A looks too busy and competes for attention.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C is in line with this, but again, goes above which the city needs.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Simpl;icity is the key
 1 (0%) 
 
 they will all work, but c will be the standout
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A and C look proportional, brige B looks unfinished and thin.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A does it best.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Top & bottom are both artistic, excellent work by the creator.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge B is too small, too narrow for the valley. Bridge A is only slightly better. Bridge C at least provides a little proportionality.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A - too small and sleek, it blends in too much Bridge C - is substantial enough over the span of the valley but when it approaches the stadium and height of the city skyline, the bridge design flourishes nicely to balance the scale of the surroundings.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge B is too small and understated for the size of it's span.
 1 (0%) 
 
 See my previous comments above.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Please go back to the drawing board and give Cleveland something that really stands out.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Again, who knows? The pictures are too small to get a true feel for what is "to scale" or not..
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A's style seems to most closely resemble other bridges in the valley.
 1 (0%) 
 
  True, but lets not get carried away with this and loose focus!
 1 (0%) 
 
 Hard to comment
 1 (0%) 
 
 Like I said before it goes well with the landscape.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The valley is quite wide .I don't think the numerous support piers are really on the same scale even if necesarry.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Again... why conform!
 1 (0%) 
 
 Brideg design A and B have elements above but are too simplistic... Design C arch doesn't make sense on one end of the bridge.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A's consistent, continuous open arches achieve this effect the best, by a large margin.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I don't see how bridge C can even be considered for this major project...it is too plain and looks like it came from either California or South Florida. Bridge A wins again.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I prefer Bridge C.
 2 (1%) 
 
 Bridge A demands attention but without overwhelming Progressive Field and the soon to be built casino on the river.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I do not like this question. I think that when this gets built, ODOT, STATE, and CITY should build this big. Put in enough lanes and build this the right way. Put in enough lanes that in the future it will be able to hold more traffic and it is easy to drive through. There are too many times that cities put in roads that onle fullfil the current need, but with something this big i really do hope that you all involved are planning for the future. Dont skip out on common sense. This is too much money to do it the wrong way. Put enough lanes in. The pictures do not give us a good sense of how big it will be in comparison to the valley. This will be big.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A and B have consistency. C is way off base with the arches only on one span.
 1 (0%) 
 
 All 3 meet the criteria.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A gives a rhythm of leaping. B is flat and lifeless C has rhythm too but I'm not fond of ruining the skyline
 1 (0%) 
 
 The overall valley is highlighted by Bridge A by making look expanded and lighted up. Bridges B and C say, HI looks at me! no JUST me!! (meaning bridge). Taking the glamor and beauty away from the valley.
 1 (0%) 
 
 As I drive from downtown towards Valley View, and when I am out in Richfield, I am always struck by the clean lines of the I480 and the turnpike bridges. Bridge C strikes a perfect balance with clean, neat lines, but not the stark plain-ness of Bridge B.
 1 (0%) 
 
 B meets the scale of the bridge best, but still barely qualifies. A is ok, but not as good. The arch on C will be completely dwarfed by the size of the span and will look completely ridiculous when compared to the overall size of the bridge itself.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Failed again!
 1 (0%) 
 
 Fail
 1 (0%) 
 
 A is sleek, graceful and beautiful especially at night. B could not BE more boring and C looks like a McBridge.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Too many columns
 1 (0%) 
 
 The only thing all the designs do is get a car from one side of the river to the other.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A may not have the arches, but each section is consistent and visually appealing.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Not worth Commenting on. Other than to say NO
 1 (0%) 
 
 Again, Bridge A contains all of these elements.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A just seems to meet all of te criteria.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The above-surface arches on bridge c are in too small a scale to be relevant. None of them have any of the statement principles to speak of.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge B may have form, but only for function and not aesthetics. If we will leave a mark, it should be an indelible mark on the skyline, but not intrusive either (Bridge C).
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridges A and B best meet form, rhythm and scale of the overall industrial valley.
 1 (0%) 
 
 As long as each arch is equal to the next one.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Once again the pics shown do not provide enough perspectives to come to any conclusion on this topic. These questions are not the problems with the designs.
 1 (0%) 
 
 GOT stone piles n allll ALllllllllllllllllll over the place along w/*$*@ exhaustpipes n gosh knows wha all allllllll OVER the place...n STILL got whutever BUILDING housin OVERlookin THAT....ok AT NITE yeah MINI NYC OVER there BUT...Thank gosh for MudderNature flingin up some scrubtrees to block off X ...
 1 (0%) 
 
 both A and c match the valley in scope and size. B gets a bit washed out, I think.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge B looks busy, like it belongs in Houston, TX. Bridge C is a good compromise. It looks like a value bridge. Bridge A as I said the more I look at it, I like how it makes a statement and has volume to it.
 1 (0%) 
 
 None of the artist renderings take this into consideration - I'd have to see the entire Site plan for each.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The C arch fits with the curviness of the valley
 1 (0%) 
 
 It is hard to determine all these criteria from the three pdf pictures. They may all meet the criteria
 1 (0%) 
 
 This may be where you have me but I really do not care about the bottom of a bridge.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A is best
 1 (0%) 
 
 The suspensions just don't seem to belong in Cleveland
 1 (0%) 
 
 i think A has good rythm but need to work on form and increase the scale of the abovedeck so the bridge just doesnt disappear above deck
 1 (0%) 
 
 Design C allows contrast above the bridge to be in balance with the activity below it.
 1 (0%) 
 
 best of the 3 ~ wish it were more dramatic like the new bridge in toledo
 1 (0%) 
 
 They all meet the criteria.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I feel that A does that
 1 (0%) 
 
 Self explanitory.
 1 (0%) 
 
 And again, when comparing with the rest of the valley, just as boring.
 1 (0%) 
 
 dfgh
 1 (0%) 
 
 It's obvious to me.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Some meet, some don't.
 1 (0%) 
 
 long valley and long bridge. A is OK, B & C follows same path.
 1 (0%) 
 
 It's gorgeous.
 1 (0%) 
 
 C looks awesome, and A looks pretty cool. B is boring.
 1 (0%) 
 
 All seem adequate.
 1 (0%) 
 
 As appealing it is to the eye to have balance I could not argue if you brought forth a more innovative design that was not in "rhythm."
 1 (0%) 
 
 For me the way the arch of bridge C rises over the valley is visually very interesting, because it opposes the natural geography and direction of the overall shape of the river valley.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A is the most rythmic choice of the 3
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridges A and B are repetitive and provide the rhythm asked of this criteria.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridges A&B match as described in explanation for question D. Bridge C doesn't match that much as described in explanations for questions E&F.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I agree.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The arches in Bridge C should be larger, or repeated as they represent a small portion of the total distance.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The bridge should A. work great and B. look great, and in that order. I definitely don't want the bridge to just, "blend in" I would like it to stand out.
 1 (0%) 
 
 At least bridges B and C make an attempt to lift the structure over the valley below.
 1 (0%) 
 
 alll are frankly uninspiring! this is our money. spend it in a way that is forward thinking and inspiring
 1 (0%) 
 
 A is the best of a VERY mediocre group of designs
 1 (0%) 
 
 valley evokes a roundness, as does c. a & b are roads.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Sure, whatever. I don't build bridges, but this has to be bridge building 101 right?
 1 (0%) 
 
 The overall valley is up and down and dynamic. I think Bridge A reminds me of the historic Indian Snake Mounds.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The arches on Bridge C (my favorite) are too small and short in length where as the valley is deep and wide. Bridge B (runner up in my opinion) has nice massive steel trusses reminiscent to the old steel industries that ran the valley, whereas A is identical to the current innerbelt
 1 (0%) 
 
 No comment. My knowledge of the question does not provide a suitable answer.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Boring, boring, boring
 1 (0%) 
 
 They are all just OK in this regard.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I think all three bridge designs follow the criteria but I think A & B fall so "in-step" with the overall valley that they don't look new and updated, they seem more like a bridge got repaired and was based off the last design. Bridge C helps tie the valley together and give it an updated, fresh look - like a newly painted room rather than a newly placed carpet square.
 1 (0%) 
 
 No Comment
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C seems to overstate the skyline view of the city. It has too much going on.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A has too large peirs. Bridge B doesn't belong in Cleveland. Bridge C is interesting, but only on one end.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A is an attractive, clean look. B is too basic, lacks personality C intrudes on the skyline, too loud
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A fits in beautifully with the valley. Again Bridge B is plain but it does fit with the valley. Bridge C I don't think fits in with all other elements of Cleveland
 1 (0%) 
 
 Matching EXISTING OLD ARCHAIC designs is NOT progressive
 1 (0%) 
 
 Arches do not fit being at one end of the bridge.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C is inconsistant in proportion
 1 (0%) 
 
 See comments on Question A.
 1 (0%) 
 
 See Comments for Question A
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A is status quo, it mimics the existing bridge and leaves us without much more than a safer version of what we already have. No matter how CHEAP Bridge B is, I pray ODOT doesn’t choose it, it's boring and in my opinion, a step back for Cleveland. Bridge C sleekly crosses the valley and boldly enters the city. I wish they had given better views of the Tremont side, but it's my understanding that ODOT was very prescriptive and all three would likely be similar. VOTE BRIDGE C!!!!!!!
 1 (0%) 
 
 It uses the skyline not hinders it.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C looks like it goes up too high at the points.
 1 (0%) 
 
 See previous answers
 1 (0%) 
 
 This one looks like it fits.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A is consistant
 1 (0%) 
 
 See comments in A.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Not completely happy with the interaction of the arches of Design C with the background from the south.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridges A and C seem a bit rococo in their arches and supports.
 1 (0%) 
 
 im not sure on the proportions
 1 (0%) 
 
 BRIDGE "A" CARRIES THE DESIGN THEME ACROSS THE ENTIRE BRIDGE LENGHT. BRIDGE "A" FITS IN NICELY WITH THE OTHER BRIDGES IN THE VALLEY.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The valley is a very massive area, and the arches pull the two sides of the valley together for a cohesive look.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I think the fact that bridges a and b have little in the way of rising sides allows them to flow more seamlessly into the surrounding valley. C however does make the more interesting note, but the sides of the bridge seem to start at an odd point on the bridge.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I feel Bridge A has perfect form and appearance.
 1 (0%) 
 
 This is bridge A strongest point.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Best design
 1 (0%) 
 
 The layout is amazing how your eye just carries on ...hump after hump
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridges B and C look small and forgetable yet A shows the waves underneath it in comparison to valleys and hills it really reflects the look of OH as you are driving through it.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I feel that Bridge A proportions the highway completely without adding to much weight to the highway.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A is a balance of the slightly rolling landscape of Ohio with the modern touch. Bridge B is too rigid. Bridge C definitely does not reflect the landscape with the overextending arches that dwarf the rest of the city.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I worry about how close the bridge is to Progressive Field.
 1 (0%) 
 
 They appear to be in accordance with other, more attractive, spans in how they manage to span the valley.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The lower elements look proportional on all 3. The decks on A & B are featureless concrete expanses. The suspension element on C is nice as far as it goes, but not proportional to the bridge as a whole, in fact can't be seen for most of the length.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I think all designs work with the valley, but the cables on Bridge C make it stand out above the rest.
 1 (0%) 
 
 See comment on question D
 1 (0%) 
 
 They certainly don't overwhelm their surroundings.
 1 (0%) 
 
 They all provide the function of a freeway bridge over a long span. They look consistent with what we are accustomed to in regard to proportion.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Ditto
 1 (0%) 
 
 B has no true design. As such there is absolutely nothing appealing about it.
 1 (0%) 
 
 see above
 1 (0%) 
 
 Difficult to really answer this based on the proposed drawings.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A shows a rhythm in the open elements where the bridge sits on the piers. No such crterion applies to B or C. Either of those 2 designs could easily function as a minor road bridge crossing an interstate highway in a rural area.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The two bridges look flat and don't stand out
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A has some elements of rhythym and scale which are compatible with its span and function, but like the other bridges, the form does not enhance the contours of the valley and the river at its center. The scale, rhythym and form of the other two are out of sync with the span of the valley and the surrounding areas.
 1 (0%) 
 
 This is a highly used bridge showing the connection between the soul of the flats and the entertainment area of the city. Bridge C allows to see the heartbeat in action.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Again, I am not an expert. It is a valley, right. So when I think of some of the bridges that I can remember, they are always the ones over valleys. especially in West Virginia. I dont want to be a broken record here, but the suspension bridge is the way to go.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Proper proportion and dimension with the overall valley would result in a single-span bridge, which would be fiscally irresponsible.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Looks about right to me
 1 (0%) 
 
 Great rhythm
 1 (0%) 
 
 I feel bridge C rates higher of form, rhythm and scale.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A is a pure example of the principles of form, rhythm and scale. the elements compliment the valley.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A seems to be too bulky underneath. C seems more consistent
 1 (0%) 
 
 C is definitely scaled proportionate and certainly has form to scale.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The concepts have a basic rhythm much like a toddler learning how to play piano. It's basic, it works, but it's not Mozart. Let's make this bridge 'Mozart'.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A is the least obtrusive of the three. Since we are not changing traffic routes in any meaningful way, we need to get from one point to another. All three do that.
 1 (0%) 
 
 None
 1 (0%) 
 
 A is in proper proportion to the valley and the scale is appropriate for the valley. C steals away from the valley and the other bridges. The history of
 1 (0%) 
 
 A = Heavy but appealing. B = no appeal C = defining form, rhythm and scale
 1 (0%) 
 
 I feel Bridge C meets these requirements.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The design and proportions of Bridge A are superb.
 1 (0%) 
 
 With the long span of the bridge, the arch is a perfect outstretched welcoming design element that tilts outward at an intriguing angle that represents strength and beauty.
 1 (0%) 
 
 B is boring, and C is garish.
 1 (0%) 
 
 B is small compared to the valley, while A and C seem decent.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The deep arches of bridge A accent the valley beautifully. Bridges B & C have shallow girders which take away from the depth of the valley.
 1 (0%) 
 
 They look out of place and bland.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A flows across the valley, Bridge B is a typical "Texas High 5" design which should stay in Tx. Bridge C is only consistent to the cable stay that will be (From your PDF) next to the baseball stadium, it just looks like a cluttered area. All visual impact is at a center point in Downtown, not consistent thru the valley area.
 1 (0%) 
 
 None of the three bridge designs seem fully sensitive to invoke or be in proper proportion with the dimensions of the overall valley. This is where doing something more creative and attuned to other structures in the valley would have made the bridge feel at home in its environment. Progressive (formerly Jacobs) Field in the Gateway area is an example of a structure near the valley that was sensitive to the character and scale of local architecture. That kind of sensitivity is what HOK is known for. Maybe they should have been chosen to submit a bridge design entry.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The spires are a good start but should extend over the whole bridge.
 1 (0%) 
 
 These are dull and unimaginative designs. Thes designs look like slightly modified highway overpass bridges found all across the USA. These 3 dull designs look like the thousands of other highway overpasses in the US - These designs look like they could come from an overpass in Montana or Nevada or Mississippis or Delaware or Arkansas or any other place since there is style to these designs. There is little that is unique about these unimaginative designs. There is "no design in these designs"; just elongated highway overpasses. NO DESIGN of these 3 will "contribute to the rich bridge architectural history of the valley". Depressingly dull designs which will haunt the entryway to downtown Cleveland for the next 50 years
 1 (0%) 
 
 Only in pic A did the rendering show what looked like landscaped valleys below the bridges. If that is part of the plan, that would be a nice touch.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Who can tell from these drawings?
 1 (0%) 
 
 If the form requirement is just a boring platform surface that will then block views of Progressive Field then job well done
 1 (0%) 
 
 The scale of Bridge A is sleek, modern and creates visual interest. The scale looks to be proportionate, and fits in very well with the valley.
 1 (0%) 
 
 bridge c
 1 (0%) 
 
 I'm not sure how the final image in Bridge C relates to the other images.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Of the three, A is the only one that gives the impression that it fits, proportionately, in the valley that it spans. Again, B is merely a slab of concrete, and the arch on C, while somewhat appealing, appears to be slapped on as an afterthought.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Again, all of these seem to be just another interstate bridge.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A fits well into the area it needs to. It doesnt exceed its required space.
 1 (0%) 
 
 It fits well in the landscape and flows with the overall valley.
 1 (0%) 
 
 None of the designs meet this criteria, they are much to shallow. "C"'s scale is all wrong.
 1 (0%) 
 
 They all look about the same.
 1 (0%) 
 
 This bridge fits into this area pefectly.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge design C looks solid with commitment to strength and safety
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C is the best fit for the valley plus offers the bonus of the Arch Span near the city and stadium.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A clearly outperforms B and C. It fits in nicely with the lay of the river and flows with the form and scale of the dimensions of the valley. Bridge C in particular is completely out of proportion with the two tall arches - completely throws off the form and proportion in look and feel and seems to be added just to make it stand out rather than add to form and function.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A presenst an excellent open form consistent with the trusses of the old bridges in the valley Bridge B although the slimness of the design is beautiful, it is not very consistent with the ruggedness of the other bridges in the area Bridge C offers I believe a solid scale in that it does not look too delicate and it stays true to the design rhythms of the area
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A is visually pleasing from all angles during day or night. Bridge B is hardly noticeable in daytime and does not use much in the way of lighting to be noticed at night. Bridge C is consistent over 95% of the structure then goes wild in the last 5%.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Again, breathtaking!
 1 (0%) 
 
 B looks out of proportion; C is a little odd and also looks out of proportion. A is the only one that really seems to fit
 1 (0%) 
 
 I'm not even sure what this means.
 1 (0%) 
 
 All these bridges do is convey traffic. There is no emotional connection: if there is "rhythm" in these designs, it is the rhythm of trudging through the snow after a long day rather than the rhythm of light dancing across the water.
 1 (0%) 
 
 C no way...B while plain fits the bill the best.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The slight arches in bridge c let your eyes flow across the valley while the cables up top stand tall as part of the cleveland skyline
 1 (0%) 
 
 again ____________^ _______________ or _________v_______ or ________________n_____________ yawn
 1 (0%) 
 
 I think a bridge should take me from here to there in a car, on a bike or on foot. I would have like to have been a fly on the wall in the meetings that used this as the foundation to move forward and spend our money.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Design A at least has some form other than a straight line of concrete. Design B is almost invisible accross the valley. Design C at least has elements that catch your eye and make an engineering statement with some flair.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Works for me
 1 (0%) 
 
 I believe the proportion of the arches on Bridge A is in scale with the span that is being bridged.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I am not an architect -- how does a normal person answer this?
 1 (0%) 
 
 By comparison, the Detroit-Superior Bridge has a grand arch span right at the river and the Shoreway Bridge has its largest arch at the river. Here, there is no distinction as to which span actually crosses the river.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The form of bridges A and B have no rhythm.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Design A stays true to the dimensions of the valley with its form.
 1 (0%) 
 
 BASIC DESIGNS, a slap in the face to this hard working city when other places are building beautiful bridges.
 1 (0%) 
 
 ALL THE BRIDGES MEET THIS CRITERIA AS TO FORM, RHYTHM, AND SCALE. BRIDGE A SEEMS TO EXCEED.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Again so what?
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A focuses on principles of form, rhythm and scale more consisently than either Bridge B or Bridge C. The scale of the bridge elements in Bridge B are not in proper proportion with the dimensions of the overall valley. Neither Bridge B or Bridge C is in proper proportion with the overall valley's dimensions.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Duhhhhhhhhhh designs
 1 (0%) 
 
 Voting for bridge A. These questions are too similar.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A - definitely has form and character B - no such character at all C - falls short of form, rhythm and definitely scale for the length of the bridge
 1 (0%) 
 
 Once again; Bridge design C exceeds the above criteria.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Again, A meets this aspect. B is too lightweight and C would meet this aspect if the cable-support system were from end to end.
 1 (0%) 
 
 i dont know
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge c rises in contrast to the dips of the valley
 1 (0%) 
 
 The designers were handed lemons; they've attempted to make lemonade. Bridge B works if the portion over Ontario St. is viewed in isolation. A merge of Bridges A and B would look best.
 1 (0%) 
 
Total: 282

15. G. Consideration of the people and environment adjacent to, and under, the bridge is important. Design should recognize the potential for future pedestrian use on the land under the bridge and consider lighting or other means to increase safety and user-friendliness.

How well does each design reflect the above criteria?

  
Does not meet Criteria
Meets Criteria
Exceeds Criteria
(%)1310231638
Bridge A
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
 12345
(%)34223383
Bridge B
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
 12345
(%)2015251525
Bridge C
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
12345
Total: 1351

16. Please provide further explanation or comments regarding your selections for Question G

 Plan A meets the above criteria very well.
 1 (0%)  
 I like the under design look of bridges A & B. Activity is constant under the bridges so having a design that would stand out is important.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has grassy areas underneath which could be for pedestrian use.  The others still look to have the rock, etc which is not practical for use of pedestrians.
 1 (0%)  
 Hard to really tell in a PDF.
 1 (0%)  
 This was close - both A and B have different/unique views from underneath.  Both A and B's lighting appears to eminate from the side-views of the PDFs provided.  Bridge C just outward/upward (hard to depict but this is what it appears to be).  More than likely there will be light from ground fixtures below, and lighting from the top enhances the archtecture of bridge C (possibly?).
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A would be the most enjoyable to look at from below. Bridges B and C look generic.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C seems to lack any form of interesting perspective from beneath.
 1 (0%)  
 In the futere the design would mesh well with pedestrians below nice land scape feature to that area below.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges B and C don't even show a use for the area beneath the bridge aside from heavy industrial use.
 1 (0%)  
 The railings are way too short.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges B and C seem to do nothing for pedestrian traffic under.  Bridge A has a very nice grassy area...it looks very nice.
 1 (0%)  
 Design A has the best underneath lighting the blue light make it look like its floating in the air.  Design B had good lighting as well.
 1 (0%)  
 You can easily see that Bridge A supports the use of the land under the bridge for pedestrians. The other 2 don't even show it. It's ridiculous.
 1 (0%)  
 Again, hard to categorize; all the bridges seem to have very similar base pylons, and all of them look similar to the existing concrete piers that hold up the current Innerbelt bridge, so I'm not sure they all do meet this criteria, because I don't think that the use of the land underneath them is going to change from how it's used now. Certainly the under-bridge lighting will make them aesthetically appealing, but I don't think that will change the use much.
 1 (0%)  
 Both Bridges A & B drawings show lighting from under the bridge Bridge C doesn't, but that's because it is a sketch of a different area under the bridge than bridges A & B.  Easy enough fix.
 1 (0%)  
 Well, they are bridges and let people walk under them.
 1 (0%)  
 Cannot really tell from design pics, but there should be a plan for that.
 1 (0%)  
 The design of Bridge C is likely to result in ice forming on the arches and falling into the valley below.
 1 (0%)  
 Not enough lighting with designs A and B. Bridge C would be more open and lit.
 1 (0%)  
 I like c.............case closed. asking the same question 50 different ways is boring.
 1 (0%)  
 All are fine.  still think Brige C will be more asthethically pleasing than the other bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has a more interesting view from below.
 1 (0%)  
 Again - love the lighting
 1 (0%)  
 Each design provides great space under the bridge. Well done.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A and C tread too heavily on the landscape.
 1 (0%)  
 I feel that all three bridges provide the correct land use to allow for pedestrian friendly areas underneath and user-friendliness. I am not impressed by the lighting scheme on Bridge B, however, and feel that it would present potential safety problems.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is great with the grassy area underneath the bridge and boats on the river.
 1 (0%)  
 I can understand that even though the people of Cleveland pushed for a bike path that one wasn't built.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C has a fresh appearance, not what Cleveland is. We need fresh designs to make Cleveland stand out, not look the same as it always has.
 1 (0%)  
 C should be brightly lit to compliment it's soaring design.
 1 (0%)  
 Not sure but if it could be incorporated on Brideg C, it would be awesome.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is well lit, has a great deal of room underneath it, and looks as if it can be expanded to have a walking/bike path divided from the freeway. Bridge B looks very straight forward with no special features. Bridge C look as if it also has some potential for pedestrian use of the pavement on and under the bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 If the nighttime renderings are a realistic example of what the lighting will be like, design A still wins hands down.
 1 (0%)  
  Difficult to determine based on simplestic renderings.
 1 (0%)  
 All land can be developed under the bridge but Bridge A will have the most impact on the area below while the other two are featureless from the bottom.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges need to ensure passage of boats underneath
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge design 'B's only redeeming quality is the view from below. The other two will both have a resonably positive impact from below.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A lights up nicely at night, although there is no way for pedestrians or bicyclists to use the bridge. The lighting on Bridge B is terrible. The PDF for Bridge C only shows lighting on the cable-arch segment, and the lighting under the bridge does not appear to be very good.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C will provide a wonderful point to view and enjoy. Bridge A will look nice from below, but forgettable from above.
 1 (0%)  
 I see why one would better than another here.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A not only makes a stunning statement, it appears to create an ideal atmosphere below.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A: appears to utilize all possibilities making it both well lit and user friendly. Bridge B: needs to elaborate on the elements and Bridge C appears to utilize some lighting but doesn't represent the overall user friendliness.
 1 (0%)  
 The only angle that is appealling in bridge design A is from underneath. The other designs seem to offer very little from that vantage point
 1 (0%)  
 Again, the cables over the street will be a disaster in winter. Ice on people's heads
 1 (0%)  
 The straight, non-arched section of C is its weakest elements when seen from the side or below. I'd love to see the design of A employed in that section
 1 (0%)  
 I think they can all basically do that, but only A shows it.
 1 (0%)  
 None of them have an advantage, but C would certainly be a better sight.
 1 (0%)  
 They all span the valley. Lighting, concrete texture and stamping will advance this idea. More green space underneath is important. With the conepts as they are today, all three play on the view from the bridge. We don't need to see anymore rust, dilapidation, and vacant industry. Parks, green space, bike access, trails, hiking, commerce, will all help this.
 1 (0%)  
 Illumination and addition of underbridge walkway seems very adaptable to Bridge A design
 1 (0%)  
 It appears that all three bridges use the same general support structure with the exception of cables on Bridge C.
 1 (0%)  
 There seems to be adiquate space under the all the bridges for other things. As far as lighting all those things can be added later. Plus if people are using a space under a bridge they know what they are getting into.
 1 (0%)  
 B is just another highway bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 All bridges (at least in the small design .pdfs) appear to have lighting more geared toward illuminating the bridge, itself, (which is not a bad thing at all), but lights need to be added to the ground around them to make them safe and user-friendly
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A provides elegant lighting.
 1 (0%)  
 This was difficult to determine from the renderings.
 1 (0%)  
 Still a little bitter about the bike path; however, I do think they all meet this one (actually, they meet it very similarly)!
 1 (0%)  
 this design does just that it ecourages people to look up to a bigger future in development
 1 (0%)  
 We could use more pictures of Bridge A at the level of Ontario to see what that will look like.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C arches may get into the way for adding pedestrian/bike walkways/rideways beside the road, Bridge A has enough elumination that pedestrians and bikers are able to see when additional walk/ride ways are created, and Bridge B would need brighter lights to have bikers and walkers feel safe.
 1 (0%)  
 Lighting of bridge A creates a safe environment below. Can't really tell the lighting schemes for the other bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 This is just beautiful....wonderful to look at
 1 (0%)  
 May be making a jaded judgment here. Design A has beautiful green lawn underneath the bridge, while the other two show bulldozers and dirt/gravel. While I know what it currently looks like, it's nice to see what it COULD be.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has the most lighting potential. Bridge C arch has lighting potential but not the rest of the structure.
 1 (0%)  
 All three meet the basic requirements. The difference in how people use the land adjacent to & under the bridge, along with how well it relates to & impacts the environment will depend on what is put there (if anything).
 1 (0%)  
 Who wouldn't want to sit under bridge A. It looks very inviting.
 1 (0%)  
 Looks clean an uplifting to see the large oval spirals,looks safe and clean could add a bike path or pedrestian walk-way
 1 (0%)  
 bridge (c0 could drop ice in the winter.
 1 (0%)  
 The beauty of each of these bridges, and their lighting make reflects a recognition of the potential of the land beneath them. Bridge B stands out in this area through its clean lines and absence of structural ties. There were no pictures highlighting the underside of Bridge C, thus I could score it no higher than Meets Criteria.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge c will allow our river to turn into a freeway(your pix) Bridge a will allow the most grassy areas that will turn into weeds and a dump. Bridge b will allow the best use of the land under the bridge. Also it will be great for the tow path.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C presents a warm and positive lighting environment. Bridge B appears to be way too dark.
 1 (0%)  
 Any bridge needs to be able to accomodate pedetrian/bycyclists, etc.
 1 (0%)  
 Lighting seems suficent on both C and A
 1 (0%)  
 ???????????????????????
 1 (0%)  
 The proposed illumination of Bridge A softens the weight of the structure and invites exploration beneath. Bridge B looks sleek from underneath, but resembles the track the tires of a big truck leave in the snow, a frightening sight. Its fast design says get out of this place quickly. The arch of Bridge C invites you to walk up and touch its base, like the base of the Eiffel Tower.
 1 (0%)  
 little kids will aqueal with delight to see bridge a at night-their lighting concept is awesome
 1 (0%)  
 as presented bridge a is a natural pick for pedestrian use. the other 2 are shown with the idea that the space is to be used for commercial purposes. so, it is difficult to make a judgement.
 1 (0%)  
 I think local businesses would be proud to say "we're directly underneath the new bridge....you know the one!"....Bridges "A" and "B" are "nice" and serve a purpose, but I think bridge "C" is more attractive....from every angle.
 1 (0%)  
 there should be bike paths and sidewalks on the bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Hard to know the answer to this without additional views from below, but generally B and C look fully functional, while A appears to be functional and also visually interesting from underneath, as well as allowing for the possibility of unique lighting.
 1 (0%)  
 enjoying the parks under the NEW INNERBELT BRIDGE"A" Bridge A: enjoying the parks on a warm summer evening Bridge B: screams--Construction personnel only please!! Bridge C: yelling I want some greenery near me!!
 1 (0%)  
 Comments made earlier go directly to this point. Bridge A is the only one offering sensitivity to all these issues while providing beauty and functionality for the valley below. Bridge A is the CLEAR winner in this category, hands down.
 1 (0%)  
 None of these designs is cluttered.
 1 (0%)  
 The current designs are just plan cement supports. Full arches would like much nicer, similar to the new DC bridge. However, grafiti will cover the lower parts of the supports, so not sure if there's a way to make them truly nicer.
 1 (0%)  
 Well I think Bridge A has good lighting and Bridge B looks like it'll be a very dim light at night. There isn't a good photo at night for Bridge C over the river part of the span to determine if it'll work well or not.
 1 (0%)  
 This one would have the most dramatic lighting effect and be pedestrian friendly also.
 1 (0%)  
 n/a
 1 (0%)  
 looks like anything is possible for future plans with designs B and C
 1 (0%)  
 Appears to be more usable space under Bridge C
 1 (0%)  
 A great place for congregations of beige Camrys with beige bureaucrats who fill their grocery bags with beige food to go work in beige office cubes who are either medicated or sadly ill equipped to see and feel.
 1 (0%)  
 A's more interesting support scheme offer the possibility of this. The other two offer nothing in this realm based on the pictures offered. How can we make this evaluation based on the pictures offered?
 1 (0%)  
 Looks like A would be well lighted at night. B had hardly any cool places to light it up
 1 (0%)  
 A has the best lighting.
 1 (0%)  
 I did enjoy the lighting aspects of all 3 bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A looks better from the ground. Bridge B is clean and plain but without character. Bridge A is cluttered underneath with the widest deck and support profile blocking the view down the valley.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C would certainly be more interesting to look at and invite more foot traffic for photography.
 1 (0%)  
 The location between the current bridge and the baseball field is too close. This has to be the largest flaw in the entire bridge design. The bridge is going to crowd the entire pedestrian feel at the entry to to the baseball stadium. Are they crazy.
 1 (0%)  
 All three meet the criteria. Simplicity again allows for more useable land beneath the bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 they look like they will all be fine
 1 (0%)  
 The spans below look good.
 1 (0%)  
 I feel proper usage and athestics below each of these three designs can be acheived correctly and sefely.
 1 (0%)  
 Looking up from the land, if it is lighted and can clearly see the color(s) of the span could be cool.
 1 (0%)  
 I really like the lighting at night with bridge A. It will look spectacular at night from the surrounding area beneath.
 1 (0%)  
 An excellent view top & bottom, and both bridges will be hugging our visitors welcoming them to Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B's lighting - at least in its pictorial representation of nighttime - is too limited. Bridge A and C make better use of pedestrian areas and light appropriately for pedestrian use. Sadly, none of the bridges consider or take into account potential bike lanes. If Cleveland really wants to move forward and be a leading city of the future, we need more bike lanes and to provide for better bike traffic. These bridges fail and in doing so they fail to help Cleveland move forward. To suggest it is acceptable because there will be bike lanes on the Hope Memorial Bridge is to ignore how bike traffic works and how people choose whether or not to bike some place. If the Hope Memorial Bridge and the Interbelt bridge moved you from the same place to the same place, it would be acceptable to ignore the need for a bike lane on this bridge. They do not and substituting sensible bike lanes on this bridge with bike lanes on a different bridge that serves different communities is irresponsible and unreasonable.
 1 (0%)  
 I really can't tell based on the computer renderings, but the bridge should be designed and built with a changing urban landscape in mind. The worst think would be to have a bridge that is a dinosaur at 10 years old.
 1 (0%)  
 I'm not sure any consideration has been given to the use of the bridge itself as a pedestrian/biking bridge. This is the way of the future - examine the new designs of the Bay Bridge in San Fransisco.
 1 (0%)  
 the land under the bridge has been industrial for over a hundred years, what makes you politicos think it will change in the next 100
 1 (0%)  
 See my previous comments above.
 1 (0%)  
 The sweeping arches of design A would provide dramatic views from the valley floor
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B looks too much like the I-480 bridge.....ugly.
 1 (0%)  
 One would hope this was the case for all of the designs! And it should look as good at night as it does during the day!
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A provides an opportunity to light the underside in a practical and fashionable way. It also includes grass in designs while the others didn't. I hope that will be included in the finished product.
 1 (0%)  
  Again if losing pillars is a benefit then bridge c might be appropriate. But must outweigh loss of view.
 1 (0%)  
 I would like to see pedestrian \ bike lanes under the deck. Possible access at each exit\entry lane to allow access to community.
 1 (0%)  
 I agree that not only should a bridge look good aesthetically, but should function equally as well for people on foot and by car- It should also be pleasing to the eye and not an ugly eyesore.
 1 (0%)  
 This question has little bearing on the overall design since most we see the bridge from the sides or top. Are you lighting up the bridge for pedestrians below?
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A shows the potential for what could be a revitalized green and user-friendly environment. B and C do not address this in the images I see.
 1 (0%)  
 The views and lighting under the bridge are as important to the development and future of the city below it.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A demonstrates an effort to at least illustrate this concept from the get-go. I live two blocks from this project and really want to see it done right.
 1 (0%)  
 The bridges all seem to have a very open design to allow for user-friendliness.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge "A" looks like it would be safer for pedestrian traffic. Less chance of concrete becoming damaged and falling on people's heads.
 1 (0%)  
 I prefer Bridge C.
 2 (1%) 
 
 there is nothing fun or exciting to look at from under bridge C but Bridge A would be great to walk under in the valley and be nice at night with the lights and all.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C and A will enhance the view from below. Bridge B will is drab and lacks vitality.
 1 (0%)  
 This is a poor question too. How are we suppose to be able to tell what would be best for travel underneath the bridge. I guess you guys involved should build the bridge real good so it doesnt fall on people. I guess i dont understand what is being asked here.
 1 (0%)  
 A is the only one that gives a hint of future use under bridge. B and C demonstrate what we are trying to eliminate.
 1 (0%)  
 A&B. Looks to have more land for the lighting of the bridge. it would be more light maintenance. C. Looks more land friendly.
 1 (0%)  
 A, B, C, can all be adapted for lighting. All appear fine for pedestrian use on land underneath bridge
 1 (0%)  
 To be honest I would not like walking next to or under Bridge C. All the "cord" looking pieces would make me nervous, afraid of the what-if scenario if one of those things break. I'm sure the not so smart people or children would look at it like a large jungle gym. This is supposed to highlight the valley and city not a freaking playground.
 1 (0%)  
 Each of the bridges has an equal opportunity to accomplish this goal.
 1 (0%)  
 A and B could both be lighted well. Apart from the arches, C has no redeeming qualities that would want to be illuminated.
 1 (0%)  
 Consideration of the people & the environment adjacent to & under the bridge? The only consideration given here was providing the motoring public a means to get from Point A to Point B. Nothing else.
 1 (0%)  
 LMAO, aren't all bridges designed this way?!?!?
 1 (0%)  
 Again, nothing unique to any of the designs that haven't been done before.
 1 (0%)  
 From below, they are all the same.
 1 (0%)  
 Don't know the drawings don't show that werr. Seem like equal to present bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is too dim and erie and gives me the sence that crime could immerge. Bridge C really didn't have a lighted seen. Bridge A looked to have the most visual light.
 1 (0%)  
 A has the arches underneath which are interesting and give a nice view.
 1 (0%)  
 Not enough detail to judge this.
 1 (0%)  
 hundreds of thousands travel OVER the bridge every day. Very few travel under the bridge. While bridge a has some interesting views from under, the others are non-descript
 1 (0%)  
 Aren't they very similar at the base regardless? They need support, but lighting like demonstrated in A would be a beginning of lighting below and could be very pleasing and effective.
 1 (0%)  
 Regardless of which design is selected, a bicycle lane addition is an absolute must! How better to promote Cleveland as a green city on a blue lake?
 1 (0%)  
 The pictures of bridge B and C don't show any potential for pedestrian or land use. Bridge A shows a park-like space and hike/bike trail. No matter which bridge is selected, set aside a part of the area and let it go back to nature -- it would hopefully become a great place for birding during migration. And lots of birders spend lots of money wherever they go.
 1 (0%)  
 The view of bridge A is just beautiful from below. The designs of B & C look like a plain highway.
 1 (0%)  
 By looking at the artists drawings, it is hard to tell what is on the ground underneath the bridges, and looks as if nothing is there already .
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has the possibility of an under deck walk/bike way.
 1 (0%)  
 A is the best lit, illuminating even the underside. C is the poorest lit of the three. B, average Cleveland - not quite enough, though it's there.
 1 (0%)  
 Boy of boy do we need lights!
 1 (0%)  
 All three do not look like they would impede the land underneath the bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 All three do not seem to create any safety concerns. If the North and South spans were moved closer together, there would probably be a problem. It would close off too much sunlight.
 1 (0%)  
 The lighting shown in design of Bridge A blends well with the lighting of the surrounding bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 C looks very pedestrian-friendly
 1 (0%)  
 Both Bridge A and C meet the criteria. Bridge C with arch cable sleek design could become the new landmark for City of Cleveland, something we need for a long time.
 1 (0%)  
 Compared to the existing structure there would be more room underneath but all 3 designs still fall short overall
 1 (0%)  
 A is best
 1 (0%)  
 further sculpting of the support pillars could help the asthetics percieved by people at a distance but even more so effect the feeling of pedestrians under the bridge
 1 (0%)  
 Design C has exciting lighting above the bridge. All bridges share the same oppurtunity below it.
 1 (0%)  
 best of the 3 ~ wish it were more dramatic like the new bridge in toledo
 1 (0%)  
 The bridge design needs to be shifted south.
 1 (0%)  
 B is the only one with a view from below, and it looks nice , but since there aren't views of the others, it's hard to tell which looks best from that view. Also, a vast majority of people won't be viewing it from that vantage point. C's arches look nice but it's hard to tell how it works with existing structures. A seems to look very nice with the lighting.
 1 (0%)  
 A tie with A & C
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A appears to have potential of hanging lights and other types of banner materials, etc. to the pedestrian user. Bridges B and C are flat and offer challenges to design enhancements.
 1 (0%)  
 Why only meet FUTURE use? You are about to build something that could potentially last for 50 - 60 years - why are you not including pedestrian and bikeways NOW???
 1 (0%)  
 I like the well planned use of space for all of the bridges, they leave plenty of room for the homeless to live under them.
 1 (0%)  
 Only bridge A gives a rendering of what that might look like. Bridges B and C don't even make an attempt at doing so.
 1 (0%)  
 C could block views.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A seems to reflect the movement toward green open areas while B &C reflect a vision of off ramp industrial development.
 1 (0%)  
 Lighting of the bridge is very important, as it will be a beacon going through Downtown Cleveland. Bridge C, with its arches seems to be capitalize on lighting, though further under bridge lighting would help, as would ability to change the colors. I am assuming LED lighting would be used.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has the best night lighting
 1 (0%)  
 It will be lovely from any standpoint and the lighting is lovely.
 1 (0%)  
 Hard to judge by who is shown in the designs.
 1 (0%)  
 C looks awesome, and A looks pretty cool. B is boring.
 1 (0%)  
 Drawings show limited detail. Bridge A does seem to clearly show a railing along the edge, but the others most likely would have something similar, although it's difficult to see from the drawings. All have appropriate lighting, and would seem to allow for the creation of walking/biking paths and other park-like areas for general use. Bridge B, with its dual spans would seem to reduce the available acreage.
 1 (0%)  
 Not sure if this bridge will accomodate a bike path. I would rather ride my bike through the Ohio City, Tremont, and the Flats then bypass them.
 1 (0%)  
 What you provide on this site does not give enough information about the design to answer the questions.
 1 (0%)  
 The rendering of bridge A looks most interesting for pedestrian use, but I think all three bridges have a space that could be successfully designed to enhance the human experience around the river.
 1 (0%)  
 All 3 take this in to account
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A and B can be easily adjusted to add pedestrian use in the future. Bridge C would have a more difficult time incorporating these issues into the future design.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A&B are just plain ugly. Bridge C isn't ugly, but is eco-friendly at the same time.
 1 (0%)  
 Lighting is important no matter which design.
 1 (0%)  
 The lighting on Bridge A is fantastic. I love the use of blue undertones underneath the bridge. I think that is a winner in lighting choice.
 1 (0%)  
 Lighting is very important. At night, the bridge all lit up with blue lights (underneath or on the bridge itself) looks fantastic.
 1 (0%)  
 At least bridges B & C make an attempt to lift the structure above the valley and make it less obtrusive to those below the structure.
 1 (0%)  
 alll are frankly uninspiring! this is our money. spend it in a way that is forward thinking and inspiring
 1 (0%)  
 In the pictures provided, bridge B seemed dark and poorly lit for people to walk accross.
 1 (0%)  
 you can make any bridge meet these requirements. we already have bridges that are lit in a very pleasing way, regardless of the structural design.
 1 (0%)  
 This could be a unique feature of the bridge. There are not too many urban bridges of which I'm aware that focus on pedestrian use underneath.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A lights up nicely. You must remember the Flats will revive Cleveland and will one day be one the most impressive areas of the world. (the Flats). The underbelly of Bridge A will win long term
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has an unique underneath design which looks great from the side with great lighting but I am not so certain of how it would look if you were directly underneath because the picture does not make it clear enough.Bridge B also has nice lightening I think the under design is interesting. With Building C may have lighting the underneath structure is not interesting
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A requires more frequent placement of piers for the support of the roadway span therefore diminishing the size and quality of use to be found in the underlying valley, Bridge B has the arch design trusses more evenly distributing weight therefore allowing many fewer piers per 2000 foot of span whereas should C be made into a true suspension bridge the amount of piers needed is determined only by the over all height of the towers and length of the suspenders, in addition to quality of cable and decking the bridge could be done with as little as 2-4 foundations in each direction b would require closer to 10-15 and A upwards of 20 to ensure longevity of life.
 1 (0%)  
 I cant tell which bridges would best suite this request.
 1 (0%)  
 All three bridges seem to be about the same in this regard. Although if I lived near the bridge, seeing a new modern bridge (C) as opposed to the same old style (A and B) would be preferable.
 1 (0%)  
 No bike paths on any of these. Nothing on any of them that will draw visual attenton.
 1 (0%)  
 Actually there is no way to tell based on the renderings provided. Just for the record, I'm glad ODOT rejected the bike lane. That was one of the stupiest ideas I ever heard.
 1 (0%)  
 I think all three bridges definitely meet this criteria and none of them exceed it. Perhaps there could be more to make the bridges "user-friendly."
 1 (0%)  
 Either Bridge A or B will achieve this purpose. Bridge A is more visually appealing for underneath and its leaner style appears to have less impact on the environment below. Bridge B, with its two thinner bridges will also minimize impact on the environment below, but is considerably wider in the bridges' overall all appearance. Thus, I give the slight edge to Bridge A. Additionally, I find Bridge A to be more visually appealing from underneath.
 1 (0%)  
 I do not see a pedestrian or bike path in the bridge renderins. Where will this be located
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is the best design for this criteria.
 1 (0%)  
 Don't see any walking or biking lanes on any design.
 1 (0%)  
 Why can't pedestrians use the bridge itself? I still don't get how it would be that much more expensive to put a bike lane on the bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 A is an attractive, clean look. B is too basic, lacks personality C intrudes on the skyline, too loud
 1 (0%)  
 I believe they would all meet this criteria
 1 (0%)  
 Unless there is something unique to the bridge design, then there is NO people considerations at all. People are unique. All attempts at uniform Chinese like conformity will fail.
 1 (0%)  
 Study after study after study has shown that lighting itself does not increase safety. It only creates the illusion of safety. Perfect example was the night power was out in the entire NE U.S. in Aug of 03. There was no spike of crime as a result. Another example was NYC removing 40,000 useless streetlights and the people upset that crime was going to spike. In all areas were streetlights were removed crime went down. These renederings do not present a real view of the nighttime bridge or city lighting that would be present. No real view it is hard to give a real viewpoint.
 2 (1%) 
 
 Bridge A allows opportunities to improve the areas under the bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C looks perfect for the above criteria!
 1 (0%)  
 See comments on Question A.
 1 (0%)  
 See Comments for Question A
 1 (0%)  
 The highest pedestrian area will be in the gateway/downtown area. Bridge C seems to be the best option with the lighted arches. No one really spends much time in the flats or valley, much more than lighting on the bridge needs to take place to increase the safety of that area. Not enough info was provided for Tremont. Bridge C seems to be the best.
 1 (0%)  
 Like I said above, the picture for Bridge A has more use to the area below the bridge, we REALLY need to clean up this city and use everything in it to its full potential.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A makes it look enjoyable from under the bridge as well.
 1 (0%)  
 Again, think that A is more than providing the proper design.
 1 (0%)  
 I love the lights under Bridge A.
 1 (0%)  
 This could be achieved by all samples.
 1 (0%)  
 See comments in A.
 1 (0%)  
 Insuffican info to fully evaluate
 1 (0%)  
 The distinctive arches of bridge C lend themselves to creative lighting and would be an attraction for people. Appears to be more open area underneath Bridge C.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A took the time to design and draw in green grass and the waterway so one could visually see where they could be. Bridges B&C did not, so I cannot select if they've the criteria. It appears that Bridge C shows some cars underneath but nothing more.
 1 (0%)  
 beautiful lighting for nite time for A
 1 (0%)  
 Given the views provided this question is unanswerable.
 1 (0%)  
 BRIDGE "A" IS THE CLEAR WINNER.
 1 (0%)  
 there is ample room for traffic under the bridge if growth is necessary.
 1 (0%)  
 While none of the bridges will inhibit use of the area underneath Bridge A seems to have the most focus on pedestrian use under the bridge while Bridge C seems to use a little more of the area for supports.
 1 (0%)  
 I live in a part of cleveland that would be affected by the bridge
 1 (0%)  
 Appears user friendly and very inviting. Looking forward to driving on Bridge A one day. Seriously.
 1 (0%)  
 I would feel safe under this bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Final plans and specifications will determine these aspects. The final details throughout design and construction are of great importance.
 1 (0%)  
 Knowing Cleveland this bridge is the best choice
 1 (0%)  
 being under bridge (A) and looking up, all you would think is WOW especially when it would be lit up
 1 (0%)  
 Design A & C both have architecturally significant super structures. Design A has a more interesting super structure and should captivate pedestrians with the lighting display shown.
 1 (0%)  
 this is an eye graber and a very friendly look to it ....it holds beauty who would'nt want to get close to it?
 1 (0%)  
 I think that walking under Bridge A would be a great experience. The potential to decorate for holidays or celebrations to draw attention is greater with Bridge A the lighting that is shown underneath in the picture of A is beautiful and breathtaking.
 1 (0%)  
 I feel that Bridge A is the better choice because Bridge A is designed to not way down the highway like the other two bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 I don't know that I can really tell this just from those pictures. There needs to be much more development apart from the bridge in order to insure this very important aspect.
 1 (0%)  
 Pedestrian and bicycle use of the bridge itself should be considered in the design. As more people choose these means of transportation they will be incorporated - that should happen at the design phase. Sidewalks and bike lanes please.
 1 (0%)  
 THESE RENDERINGS GIVE US INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION
 1 (0%)  
 Cable arch allows for more open space under the road.
 1 (0%)  
 See Comment on Question D
 1 (0%)  
 Not sure how to answer this one.
 1 (0%)  
 A is more open or airy to let more ambient light thru. B an C will block daylight.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is more interesting from below than the others.
 1 (0%)  
 I used to work for a company under the Lorain Carnegie bridge and know the area. These all will not be a hinderance to any future development.
 1 (0%)  
 ditto
 1 (0%)  
 I doubt that land will have any use for a long time to come.
 1 (0%)  
 see above
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has good lighting, but what will it cost to light that bridge as shown? I hope they took that into consideration.
 1 (0%)  
 I think they all do this. Bridge C is the best though.
 1 (0%)  
 There is not enough information presented to enable us to make a meaningful determination.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A and B don't seem to have adequate lighting on top of the bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 All are OK. C will require fewer lights for a nice effect, and is a greener design. B will be hard to repair, and A requires more paint than either design.
 1 (0%)  
 All designs meet criteria
 1 (0%)  
 All bridges appear to be consistent with the existing bridge in terms of the footprint. With no provisions for rail, bicycles or pedestrian use or pathways on or under the deck of the bridges, I don;t know why this question is being asked? A 21st century bridge should have at least one of these non-automobile uses incorporated into the design, and none of the three designs do.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A shows some green space under the bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Visually, the artist renderings on bridge A did not provide the true picture of the area
 1 (0%)  
 can't tell by the pictures given
 1 (0%)  
 I do not claim to know the lighting designs of these bridges. i am more of a voice from the commom citizen. The suspension bridge is the way to go.
 1 (0%)  
 Is it the intent to eliminate the industries under the bridge and replace it with "green areas" or to build a cost-effective bridge that vehicles will drive across?
 1 (0%)  
 Plenty of room beneath and the lighting above is beautiful. Shouldn't be a problem for pedestrians under the bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Great lighting concept
 1 (0%)  
 With the open space beneath bridge C this could open bike or pedestrian access that has been requested with this bridge design.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A design the would contribute to pedestrian use and be user friendly. Although I haven't seen the A with lighting the design has unlimited possibilities.
 1 (0%)  
 The view on Ontario as you enter into Cleveland for Sporting Events, Concerts, or other venues will be incredible
 1 (0%)  
 Many options for C in terms of lighting and under expansion.
 1 (0%)  
 These renderings are unable to address this question.
 1 (0%)  
 This is a joke. If ODOT truly was concerned about making this project user friendly, it would have required bike lanes. Very few people will walk across this bridge. The information provided does little to illuminate how the spaces under and around each bridge could be used.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A provides a better lighting theme, Bridge C provides openness to pedestrian, and bike traffic.
 1 (0%)  
 It is not really possible to determine this from what has been presented.
 1 (0%)  
 Not sure but B seems like it would be difficult to space lighting since pillars are so distant.
 1 (0%)  
 I feel Bridge C meets these requirements.
 1 (0%)  
 Lighting and design are a key integral superior factor in Bridge A.
 1 (0%)  
 this was the only design that used any lights at all to illuminate it's grace and fluidity, rather than just lighting up the underside. When you see those arches, you will know you are in Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge A is the only one that looks well lit underneath
 1 (0%)  
 Impossible to judge, based on the provided drawings. There's no sense of human scale.
 1 (0%)  
 The bridge should have a Bike lane, FYI. The lighting I would need more specs for.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A hits it out of the park. Brdidges B & C are Cold.
 1 (0%)  
 I do not see anything remotely designed in the designs.
 1 (0%)  
 To look from under the bridges your going to see girders, and concrete beams, as in Bridge A, there is a style of steel webbing, this is more pleasing then single T beams sitting on piers.
 1 (0%)  
 I see no sensitivity in the bridge design to these issues. Perhaps a lower bridge deck for pedestrians and bike lanes would have been one way to accomplish this.
 1 (0%)  
 The bridge should have unique lights and make it look historical to Cleveland's past.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is the only one that showed some improvement to the land under and along the structure.
 1 (0%)  
 I cannot adequately tell if any of the bridges meet this criteria from the limited renderings.
 1 (0%)  
 I never looked at the expense of lighting but we lighted the Smithfield Street Bridge in Pittsburgh and I like it very much.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A meets the lighting criteria and appears to be the most user-frendly based on the design drawings.
 1 (0%)  
 Difficult to tell from the images for Bridge B and Bridge C.
 1 (0%)  
 The location of this bridge will crowd Gateway - especially Progressive Field. Good planning!
 1 (0%)  
 Use of green space under the bridge A would be a welcome addition to downtown Cleveland! Bridges B and C look like there are plans for piles of rocks.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A appears to have covered all the criteria. Bridge C has failed with lighting and safety.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge c
 1 (0%)  
 No bike lanes.
 1 (0%)  
 This is probably the only criteria where B seems to make the most sense.
 1 (0%)  
 I understand that there are no provision for bike / walking lanes on the bridge -- why not? Also, unsure what landscapping will be done
 1 (0%)  
 Lighting on A reminds of the bridge lighting of the mid 90's. Wow, the other two barely look like they thought about lighting in the design.
 1 (0%)  
 It looks very user friendly from all angles.
 1 (0%)  
 I think this is a ridiculous proposition. Land areas under highway bridges are noisy, dusty, dark, littered and generally unfit for human use. Please do not try to sell me that any amount of lighting can improve these tunnels or make them friendly. I walk/drive/pedal down Abbey Rd, under the existing bridge, all the time, and it is dismal, and now you're going to make it even LONGER. Oh joy. You have decided that the travel convenience of someone passing through the city is more important than land, homes, businesses in my neighborhood. Don't insult me by saying that you will make it "livable." Perhaps they should put your offices under the bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Excellent clearance.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge design C would be safe and provide for pedestrian usage
 1 (0%)  
 The arch span at night will be spectacular.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has much more in the way of flexibility - particularly directly under the span of the bridge for future pedestrian use. The manner in which they've arranged the bridge over the land will allow for future land development for possible parks, recreation areas and/or water-front development. I don't see the same possibilities for Bridges A & B - in fact the arches on Bridge C make enhancing safety almost impossible and Bridge B does not have enough stability underneath to make pedestrian traffic both safe and user friendly. I don't see how either B or C have left enough room on the land underneath to maximize it's use.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is the only rendering that showed any attention to possible future use of the environment under the bridge, and it looks very inviting in theory. Bridges B and C depicted only what the area looks like currently without any proposed landscape changes.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A will be notice from long distances due to the aesthetic lighting but also provides for safety beneath the structure due to all of the lighting. Bridge B obviously had little budget for lighting while Bridge C is only concerned with showcasing 5% of the structure.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A shows the possibilities for under the bridge and based on the design A's Lighting is playing a big part of the design which follows most of the other bridges in the area which have so much light in them. There is nothing like being in parts of Clevelands at night and seeing the bridges glowing from the lights.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is the most user-friendly
 1 (0%)  
 Again, A is the only one that seems to meet and exceed this criteria. All B & C account for is dirt and construction under the bridge. A is well landscaped and appealing to the eye.
 1 (0%)  
 In the pictures with the green grass and people walking around, it looks okay, but we know that that is not what is under those bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 It is hard to evaluate what isn't pictured. More details would make this question easier to answer.
 1 (0%)  
 in bridge C, the large unobstructed areas between ground supports allow for many future pedestrian uses. Lighting can be easily designed for safety and artistic value.
 1 (0%)  
 B is the only bridge that would take this into account.
 1 (0%)  
 how can one determine what is happening below the bridge with the pictures presented ?
 1 (0%)  
 West third street bridge is the lited arch bridge of cleveland we dont need another. Bridge C is the newer more modern of the 490 style bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 "A" has complimentary lighting from the side and under that can be viewed from other bridge views and from pedestrians below
 1 (0%)  
 How about pedestrians ON the bridge....e.g. 1,000 or more pedestrians cross ON the Brooklyn Bridge DAILY!!!! Wake up Ohio, the heyday of the car is setting and Cleveland is falling asleep. These bridges all reflect an automobile-centric view.
 1 (0%)  
 And how about pedestrian and bike over the land.
 1 (0%)  
 Design C at least has the most interesting visuals as pedestrians are under the bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has all those requirements. I see it being an attraction for pedestians.
 1 (0%)  
 Consider the people under the bridge. A safety fence should be considered. Something that looks nice to add to the appearance. People that unfortunatly throw stuff from the bridge or jump has an impact on the people and buisiness below.
 1 (0%)  
 I think that the arched supports of Bridge A are appealing to a pedestrian or anyone that should find themselves under the bridge at any time. I love the night lights that are pictured for bridge A!
 1 (0%)  
 The 2 bridge concept was the wrong idea; pursued without really giving thought to the impact that the outcome will have on the City.
 1 (0%)  
 I'm disappointed w/ ODOT's refusal to consider pedestrian options on the new bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Once again, why would an ordinary citizen have the knowledge to answer this? How about asking, does it make the city look nicer and cleaner, or doesn't it?
 1 (0%)  
 From what I can see, no walkway or bike route included in the designs; what a disappointment.
 1 (0%)  
 No information has been presented about pedestrian access and none of the designs seem to incorporate any type of grade-level park or pathway system.
 1 (0%)  
 Would most likely pick bridge A from underneath.
 1 (0%)  
 The biggest environmental attraction to bridges is pigeons and their droppings. Minimizing open portals and flat surfaces will minimize the required cleaning. The bridge should be open and airy to minimize the wind tunnel effect beneath it during the winter.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A captures the environemnt from the community's perspective, especially the pedestrian corridor.
 1 (0%)  
 Design A presents a revitalization of the entire valley in the area, something Cleveland needs.
 1 (0%)  
 HARD TO TELL FROM PICTURES HOW MUCH AREA IS LEFT TO GIVE PEDESTRIAN USE OF THE LAND, HOWEVER ALL THE BRIDGES SEEM TO BE ALLOWING FOR PROPER LIGHTING AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC
 1 (0%)  
 Thats not something I can speak to by looking at pictures
 1 (0%)  
 It is not clear how these items were adressed
 1 (0%)  
 Based on the renderings submitted for each of the Bridge designs, Bridge A considers the people and environment adjacent to and under the bridge, considering pedetrian use of the land under the bridge, lighting and overall user friendliness. Bridge B and Bridge C shows no such consideration in their renderings. Both show industrial uses.
 1 (0%)  
 Again, from under the bridge, Design A is the best looking and provides a more desireable look than the other two proposed structures.
 1 (0%)  
 The Flats Dock area was always my idea of public access and walking about the BEAUTIFUL area.(yea right)
 1 (0%)  
 This is a good comment question - bridge A is certainly going to be the most interesting from below, and will provide for a nice look and feel.
 1 (0%)  
 Have not seen the area under either bridge but the Y covers more area of support where B leaves length of cement open with no secondary layer of support.
 1 (0%)  
 The design of Bridge C from what I can see; would allow for maximum pedestrian use , and only the imagination can allow for all the lighting possibilities.
 1 (0%)  
 All designs would meet this criteria inasmuchas their height allows them all to be far enough above the valley floor as to allow light and a feeling of open space beneath them.
 1 (0%)  
 too many questions
 1 (0%)  
 There would be plenty of room under bridge c for all of the above
 1 (0%)  
 I cannot believe that ODOT has actually asked this question. Really? The fact that ODOT has decided to build a second bridge even closer to our city core, in an era when other cities are removing freeways from those areas, really shows just how out of touch ODOT is. There is no "future pedestrian use" to speak of, and to allude to it is insulting. How does this bridge increase "safety"? Studies show that street grids are safer than merging onto freeways at high speeds (as our Inner Belt now does).
 1 (0%)  
Total: 340

17. H. The design should be sensitive to the scale and appearance of the neighborhoods where it touches down and should respect the special character of Tremont and Gateway.

How well does each design reflect the above criteria?

  
Does not meet Criteria
Meets Criteria
Exceeds Criteria
(%)1411241634
Bridge A
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
 12345
(%)37233172
Bridge B
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
 12345
(%)2314231228
Bridge C
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
12345
Total: 1351

18. Please provide further explanation or comments regarding your selections for Question H

 Brdidge C exceeds here in representing the gateway in design and form.
 1 (0%)  
 I see no reason why bridge A would conflict with the above guidelines.
 1 (0%)  
 With bridge A, from the Gateway and Tremont area, you will still be able enjoy the same view, however with bridge C and the archway, the view will be obstructed.
 1 (0%)  
 eventually..all of the homes that are boarded up or worn..will be torn down and replaced. the bridge should reflect the future  not current or past conditions
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A, again, is conservative looking whereas Bridge B, from underneath and sides, remind me of the bridge (somewhat) that crosses Seven Hills' area of 480 Eastbound.  Bridge C, again, in relation to communities around it, brings on a sense of growth and accomplishment since those areas have come a long way in development, appearance, and niches.
 1 (0%)  
 I see nothing that respects the character of Tremont and Gateway.
 1 (0%)  
 In my opinion B,and C do not offer visually the nice overall character that area needs desperately!!
 1 (0%)  
 It is hard to tell from these renderings how the bridge will relate to Tremont, but from what is shown, none appear to respect the special character of Tremont. Only Bridge C seems to be on scale and respective of Gateway's character.
 1 (0%)  
 These monstrosities fit nothing.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges B and C seem to keep the surrounding areas and areas underneath very plain and industrial even.  Bridge A makes things visually appealing and it looks like it will provide park area for neighboring residents.
 1 (0%)  
 I'm not sure how a bridge could reflect the unique aspects of Tremont (where the main architectural theme are the many church spires of the Eastern European churches). Perhaps it could be noted that the gentle curves of the "lacework" in Bridge A could be reflective of those spires. Again, B and C are just run-of-the-mill bridges that could be in any city, and show no unique-to-Cleveland qualities.
 1 (0%)  
 Our skyline needs something state of the art looking.  Whether it be a building or a bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Th esteel trusses match the existing better than the other options.
 1 (0%)  
 They look like every other highway bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Cannot really tell from design pics, but there should be a plan for that.
 1 (0%)  
 See above
 1 (0%)  
 All seem fine in this regard.
 1 (0%)  
 Again Bridge B and C are quite plain especially from West bank bike path. Bridge C looks great for Ontario, but that's about it.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C places its focus on the Gateway area only
 1 (0%)  
 Again, other than the arches on C near Gateway, we don't really see how either design touches down into the neighborhoods in these renderings.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C's arches are a great complement to Progressive Field and the design elements and theme of Gateway. The arches ARE a gateway. Design A is reminiscent of railway and other bridges in the area and, I think, is sensitive to the character of Tremont. Design B is sensitive by being non-obtrusive, and, dare I say, boring.
 1 (0%)  
 These bridge designs to not reflect the character of Cleveland, much less Tremont or Gateway.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A and B neither add to nor take away from the character of Tremont and Gateway with the way they are designed. The arches of Bridge C provide a good landmark in Gateway, and I am wonder if there will be a similar landmark created in Tremont.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C -- From the drawings, looks like it blocks Progressive Field a little bit?
 1 (0%)  
 The materials provided to the public fail to show this.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C has a fresh appearance, not what Cleveland is. We need fresh designs to make Cleveland stand out, not look the same as it always has.
 1 (0%)  
 C- too modern to blend with tremont
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C appears a little too large and excessive for a smaller community like Tremont.
 1 (0%)  
 Tremont is trendy, and together with Gateway exemplify the vibrant nightlife in and around the downtown area. The dramatic lighting of design A would certainly enhance that.
 1 (0%)  
 Difficult to determine from renderings provided. This is of specific concern as I am a Tremont resident.
 1 (0%)  
 I don't believe any of them would stick out in Tremont or Gateway.
 1 (0%)  
 The details of the approaches are not adequately defined in the renderings to make further comment
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A does not disrupt the neighborhoods at its ends, but doesn't seem to improve them either. Bridge B does not look good and will not benefit anyone. Bridge C looks fine with the neighborhood at the Gateway end, as long as those cables don't drop ice onto the road. But the PDFs don't show the Tremont end and what we can see of the rest of the bridge looks no better than Bridge B.
 1 (0%)  
 The steel cable arch is a bone thrown because it only goes over ONE STREET. If the arch design was incorporated throughout the bridge (see the new Main Avenue bridge in Columbus), it would be much more appealing.
 1 (0%)  
 The arches on Bridge C remind me of a Gateway.
 1 (0%)  
 I'm not sure the suspension section of C jives with Gateway, but I still like it.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A makes a statement while melting into the area in a way the other 2 don't.
 1 (0%)  
 I feel none of the designs interfere with the overall character of the adjacent neighborhoods.
 1 (0%)  
 A and B do go a little better with Tremont - historic ... but C accents the modern Gateway area much better.
 1 (0%)  
 Putting it underground would be the only solution that respects the scale of its surroundings
 1 (0%)  
 There is no features that are appealling - they are concrete poles
 1 (0%)  
 See comments under G above
 1 (0%)  
 It's time for this city to get with the times and get more modern. Make a fashion statement with this bridge and the rest of the city will follow.
 1 (0%)  
 They all invade the space, but that ship sailed 50 years ago. A non-factor. Most Tremont businesses and visitors (myself included, as I'm there frequently) certainly griped when the neighborhood was unapproachable due to construction. A non-issue. It's a freeway. At least C will be a nce view from the neighborhood.
 1 (0%)  
 Walk through Tremont, Ohio city, or Cleveland Proper and show me where you see minimalism. The design could be different on either end. One with the rich history of cleveland's oldest heighborhoods, and the other with the idea of commerce, leisure, sports, action, etc. of downtown. Symmetry is not always better.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A, in my opinion, again, exemplifies Cleveland's past, present and future. The design is clearly the MOST complimentary with respect to this cities diverse architecture and design.
 1 (0%)  
 All the bridges seem to match the scale of tremont and Gateway However, I think bridges A and C bring more interest to the citizens having to look at the bridge everyday.
 1 (0%)  
 I don't think this will be a problem. Tremont is tucked in under the bridge, and an exciting design may do more to attract people into those areas than something that looks like what we've had.
 1 (0%)  
 The wire arch on bridge C is too big for the small bridge it is on.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A is consistent throughout the entire span.
 1 (0%)  
 We are not given any evidence of this
 1 (0%)  
 Here each bridge would "collaborate" with each neighborhood's character...
 1 (0%)  
 and it will bring them into all the asthetics needed to promote those areas
 1 (0%)  
 Again, need more pictures to see what this will look like in the Tremont area say near W. 14th street. It would be great to have the arches like in Bridge C in the Tremont area since it is such a great place and much visited by out of towners.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B & C seem to have narrower posts and less obstackles under the bridge while Bridge A has creative bracings on the sides that may not be liked by neighborhoods in the area. Arch of Bridge C may be considered an eye sore, not living there.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is an additional 'Gateway' to our city
 1 (0%)  
 Do not know enough about this to comment
 1 (0%)  
 While bridge A looks great I think over time it will lose its luster as it ages. If we had C to A this will keep the character for generations as opposed to just when it opens. Bridge B has zero character to add to the cities.
 1 (0%)  
 Again, showing our progress in making Cleveland the best city in the nation
 1 (0%)  
 I'm not sure we can make a good judgment call of that, based on the designs we are shown. Tremont is full of historical character. Not sure than any of the bridges really reflect that, although Bridge A does the most.
 1 (0%)  
 Tremont, with it's classic architecture and remodeled look would fit any of the designs.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A adds character where ever it touches down.
 1 (0%)  
 The scale looks dramatic and appearance looks clean and not so heavy looking like the old bridge at night it even looks clean and fresh and well lit.
 1 (0%)  
 The modernistic design of bridge (c) does not mesh with the neighborhoods.
 1 (0%)  
 It is difficult to pick up this aspect of the bridges from the supplied renderings except for Bridge C, which shows a good tie between the bridge and Gateway. It almost gives a "time machine" feel to it as you go from traditional Tremont to the modernization of downtown with the bridge suspension with Progressive Field in the background.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B will bring the best entrance into Treemont. Not to flashy orgaudy tht the other bridges would bring. Lets face it on both ends of the interstate bridge we do not have rich and fancy areas. Its the honest working middle class.
 1 (0%)  
 The arches on Bridge C give a perfect appearance for the Gateway area with the arches being a metaphor for the gateway to the city.
 1 (0%)  
 I believe that C does this best especially C with the stadium behind it.
 1 (0%)  
 ???????????
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A looks spectacular from the Tremont perspective. Bridge B urges you to whisk by both without even taking a look. Bridge C pays special attention and welcoming to Gateway, but seems to minimize the importance of other sections of the city by comparison.
 1 (0%)  
 Not enough info.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge a would further enhance the special character in tremont
 1 (0%)  
 The Tremont and Gateway districts are innovative and artistic neighborhoods. No way do the designs offered reflect the character of those neighborhoods. Scrap the designs and don't limit the imagination of the designers with ODOT's boring and conservative criteria.
 1 (0%)  
 both of these neighborhoods are in the process of renewal and the area under any of the bridges should be pleased with the space that will be renewed in the area. the supports of the bridges will, i believe, make contained and more horticulturally pleasing areas whether for entertainment or commerce.
 1 (0%)  
 The arches speak Gateway...
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge "C" is more "artfully done", and would better reflect the artsy neighborhood of Treemont. and the gateway district.
 1 (0%)  
 Tremont and gateway are different none of the designs really meet both in the middle some brick work would help tie it togehter.
 1 (0%)  
 No additional comments for this item.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A: the green spaces will allow Gateway, Warehouse district, tremont, Ohio City embrace its appearance and styling Bridge B: stuck in circa 1950's old n draby Bridge C its ok desgin but will not compliment Tremont, Ohio city or Gateway areas
 1 (0%)  
 This criteria should allow for additional weight to be given to feedback providers from the Tremont & Gateway neighborhoods for obvious reasons.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is boring and maybe fits and resembles what is already there.
 1 (0%)  
 Exactly what does a suspension bridge match up design-wise with Gateway? Answer: it doesn't. They didn't build those light towers on Progressive Field to be toothbrushes! They did that to reflect our steel heritage and did a great job offering a design signature that makes it a great ballpark to go to. I mentioned in a previous answer that Bridge A looks shorter than it really is. I think that would really fit in well with the Tremont neighborhood.
 1 (0%)  
 This is nostalgic as well as modern for Tremont and Gateway.
 1 (0%)  
 n/a
 2 (1%) 
 
 The excitement of the arch support system does not extend into tremont and gateway -- it's much more conservative therer
 1 (0%)  
 The plain and sad designs all do a good job of reminding me how plain and sad the Indian's baseball team is, nice work blending with mediocrity.
 1 (0%)  
 Brdge C's wire sling section is in conflict with Progressive Field. It would have made much more sense to have put the "Feature" section over the river rather than over Ontario Street. What were they thinking?
 1 (0%)  
 I believe A has a retro, updated look. C looks to modeern to fit in with Tremont. A B is just plain ugly.
 1 (0%)  
 if you are looking to make sure that this bridge DOESNT stand out, then every single one has done that.
 1 (0%)  
 There is a unique challenge presented when attempting to respect the special character of both Tremont and Gateway- given that the 2 neighborhoods are completely different and one is new while the other embraces it's older age. I don't feel any of the bridges really paid respect to Tremont, though I do feel they mesh well with Gateway.
 1 (0%)  
 I grew up in the Tremont area and don't need a reminder of the failed past from Bridge A. Bridge B is is a bland just-another-bridge design. Bridge C has the modern character needed.
 1 (0%)  
 I don't see much difference between them in this regard.
 1 (0%)  
 Tremont and Gateway are both vibrant areas of the city. A new bridge should endeavor to maintain or even escalate that vibrancy. Bridge C does a better job of this than the other two, in my opinion.
 1 (0%)  
 All three meet the criteria.
 1 (0%)  
 c looks like a gateway not just a freeway
 1 (0%)  
 I don't see anything that reflects the characters of Tremont or Gateway, except in C. They all just....blend in.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A blends in, bridge B is very plain. Bridge C, while very modern looking, would compliment the surrounding arena and stadium while the spans would be far enough from the ornate churches of Tremont and not be a distraction.
 1 (0%)  
 If I had a home overlooking the bluff I'd think: "not very intriguing. Just another bridge. The only think could save this bridge would be some spectacular lights t night.
 1 (0%)  
 Looking at the rendition, bridge c arches looks like they're competing w/jacobs fiied..though I do like the arches
 1 (0%)  
 All 3 do but C again has the BIG HUG that is important to me, not a boring bridge that is too common in cities.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C best complements both Tremont and Gateway - giving clear linear lines with style. To the extent that it reflects anything in Cleveland, it at least resembles the Detroit-Superior bridge and evokes the infrastructure of Progressive Field. It won't add a great deal to Tremont.
 1 (0%)  
 See comments for question F
 1 (0%)  
 Aesthetically the design of Bridge A appeals to me the most from that perspective.
 1 (0%)  
 Downtown Cleveland is dead and dangerous. One cannot go down there without risking being harassed or ripped off by car thieves etc. The west side is another decaying area with drug dealers and thugs.
 1 (0%)  
 See my previous comments above.
 1 (0%)  
 I'd like someone to explain how any of these meet the "special character" of either area.
 1 (0%)  
 Citizens in these areas should be most strongly considered.
 1 (0%)  
 UGH. seriously? All anybody wants is a good looking bridge that's safe and that doesn't need maintenance every other year
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge a - looks to incorporate the feel of the surrounding communities best. Bridge B seems to be more of an obstruction to the surrounding community. Bridge c 's arches will definitely block views of the gateway. If they were located closer to the center it would be a wonderful design
 1 (0%)  
  Sure.
 1 (0%)  
 Pedestrian Bike lanes would be good here
 1 (0%)  
 Knowing the area of Tremont I think it is trendy, yet will remain timeless at the same time.
 1 (0%)  
 I don't think any of them are of a human scale.
 1 (0%)  
 Tremont is a wonderful area which I visit on a regular basis. The bridge design, especially from the side needs to have some kind of design that flows with this area. No design shown above will capture this element.
 1 (0%)  
 Similar comments made to above question would apply here.
 1 (0%)  
 Here is where "C" only advances it beauty. It only looks good from the Gateway area and offers nothing for the Tremont area.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A looks like a modern version of the existing bridge, and with its pleasing arches and single span construction it most reflects what I would like to see as a lifelong Tremont resident.
 1 (0%)  
 I prefer Bridge C.
 2 (1%) 
 
 Bridge C underscores a step forward. It will make it's neighbors look even better.
 1 (0%)  
 I dont know these neighborhoods well, but most of the housing in cleveland is average. I see the run down terrible looking houses, and i also see where the average joe lives. I do not see too much of the big nicer housing because i think that is located outside the city limits or near the outter parts of the city. I think the proposed Bridge C is nicer, its fresh, its something new that the city needs.
 1 (0%)  
 Hard to tell
 1 (0%)  
 A&B. Keeps the same look. C. modern meet past.
 1 (0%)  
 Having grown up in those neighborhoods, a bridge with character and reflection of light would be great for future growth.
 1 (0%)  
 All I can say to that is, sometimes too much is simply TOO MUCH. Bridge B and especially C are just too much.
 1 (0%)  
 More than the other two, Bridge C brings a spectacular statement to the Gateway District. I think the team made a good decision only putting this arch at the east end...it would not fit the character of the Tremont District, and putting it over the river means it would be lost to many who come to Gateway from the east.
 1 (0%)  
 With a bridge of this size, there is no way it will ever be sensitive to the surrounding neighborhoods. They are giant cut-throughs that divide neighborhoods.
 1 (0%)  
 No consideration was given to the special character of the Tremont or Gateway neighborhoods.
 1 (0%)  
 Don't see how plain cement stanchions reflect special characteristics of anything. Tremont and Gateway are much more upscale.
 1 (0%)  
 Unknown
 1 (0%)  
 Tremont is old, yet on a comeback. Gateway is new and has modern design quality. These bridges have an opportunity to create their own nuance - but fail.
 1 (0%)  
 B is just plain ugly.
 1 (0%)  
 This bridge should augment the astetics of gateway. The other side of the bridge should not match an are that is ripe for redevelopment, because of it's age and predatory lending. We should think bold, not cheap.
 1 (0%)  
 I think it will work (A).
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge c destoys the Gateway neighborhood with its arches suddenly protruding from the roadway, an obvious attempt to deceive the public into thinking this design has some interest, when it is only a short distance at the Gateway end that obscures the view of the stadium, the vey centerpiece of Gateway
 1 (0%)  
 I am going to assume they all will meet this criteria. You can't tell from the pictures as there are no photos of where they touch down.
 1 (0%)  
 A wins hands-down especially in Tremont.
 1 (0%)  
 Once again the designs fail to provide the viewer with any sort of idea of how these bridges enter Gateway and the Tremont areas, therefore how can this question be seriously judged. Something similar to the entrances of the Hope Memorial bridge would be nice though, just something.
 1 (0%)  
 AMAZIN Taggers CAN GET UP THERE n do their Thing Thing..check out Powliskis Polish LITERARY restaurant overlookin the Flats..go TOWARDS HUGE clevelandColdstorage bldg..yeahh...WOULD suggest barbedwire,etc.BUuuut..ALllllll this PLASTIC bags n such would just get allll *$*@ over it..along w/birdsnests,etc.etc.etc.
 1 (0%)  
 A gives the bang for our bucks. C is just way too stand outish, and would fight with Gateway, especially. b is so quiet in design, it could fit in anywhere!
 1 (0%)  
 Tremont is unique. (not familiar with Gateway) Bridge C is unique : )
 1 (0%)  
 That's an interesting question. Since Bridge C is basically blue, it will blend in with the sky. This would make this the best choice. I do think that the statement of Bridge A may add to the special character of Tremont and Gateway.
 1 (0%)  
 I was born into the Tremont area when it was working class and not "trendy". These are not times to be "affluent" or demanding. I'm would hope whatever bridge is chosen, it would be appreciated.
 1 (0%)  
 A and C look very unique, just like the arts
 1 (0%)  
 not enough evidence to make any judgements
 1 (0%)  
 all 3 are plain, how does each relate to either Progessive Field or the Q or the Tremont area. There is nothing to say anything on all 3 designs for any of these areas.
 1 (0%)  
 maybe if the concrete supports diameters were roughly sculpted to resemble giant redwood tree trunks by increasing diameter at the ground level and adding vague texturing similar to art deco of hope memorial transportation gaurdians then maybe the supports might blend into the appearance of the neighborhoods more readily as megalight sulpture or giant trees. this idean not unlike frank lloyd wright lillypad pillars of johnson wax building thought much thicker so done to vaguely resemble tree trunks.
 1 (0%)  
 best of the 3 ~ wish it were more dramatic like the new bridge in toledo
 1 (0%)  
 A: would be a good fit for gateway and tremont, and B would be even better C: is a poor addition to gateway, and looks stale and incongruous with the design aesthetics of tremont
 1 (0%)  
 You haven't released data for me so determine the impact on Tremont. The bridge's location to Gateway will ruin it.
 1 (0%)  
 I guess they meet the criteria, none of the views show this aspect so it's hard to answer correctly. I'm not sure how C's arches mesh with the Progressive Field though.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A would look great to Tremont and Gateway. Bridge B would most likely not have character. Bridge C arches might look okay for a while but would be a concern over time.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C at least adds an interesting flair by Jacobs (sorry, Progressive whatever) Field, but the Tremont side is boring on ALL three. Considering Tremont is a vibrant, revitalizing neighborhood, why hasn't that been taken into account on that end of the three bridges?
 1 (0%)  
 It is impossible to tell from the visuals provided.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B id foul looking while the other two examples are pretty vibrant.
 1 (0%)  
 Can you guess where I'm headed? Bridge B looks like any freeway bridge anywhere in the USA, and bridge C doesn't speak to either Gateway or Tremont. Bridge A tweaks the design enough to appear fresh while not being an affront to traditional sensibilities.
 1 (0%)  
 C does not blend in any way.
 1 (0%)  
 I really do not know if that is possible.
 1 (0%)  
 The arches speak of a "Gateway" which is what Gateway has become with Progressive Field and The Q.
 1 (0%)  
 The supports of Bridge A are to clunky/chunky looking. If they need to stay that way to support structure, then so be it.
 1 (0%)  
 It's a graceful arrow to connect the neighborhoods.
 1 (0%)  
 I disagree with the premise. Does the "new" Bunker Hill Memerial Bridge in Boston (with the cable-stay design), reflect the"special character" of 300-year-old Boston? No. Does it look like any of the other bridges crossing the Charles River there? No again. Do people like it? Yes! In fact, it is now considered the signature bridge of Boston. Don't be afraid to be bold!!!
 1 (0%)  
 C looks awesome, and A looks pretty cool. B is boring.
 1 (0%)  
 I believe any of these would be a tremendous improvement over the current bridge. The bridge will likely outlive the current "trendy" Tremont area, so I don't believe this should be a deciding factor. As for Gateway, I expect the more modern buildings in that area - Progressive Field, Quicken Loans Arena, and whatever design the new Casino takes - should welcome visitors, and Bridge C would seem to be more compatible with that view.
 1 (0%)  
 This is kind of over doing it. No matter what you build as long as it has a little flash to it then the region will be content. A plain Jane bridge will not satisfy. Personally as a sibling of a structural engineer and an architect...I would throw all three in the garbage and have someone come up with a design that really compliments this cities dire need for positive attention.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C offers a different skyline so I would think that would impact the surrounding areas.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C adds something special to each of these areas. Bridges A and B do not add anything special to the approaches to the bridge that we can see.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridges A&B look old like the nieghborhoods are. Bridge C looks new not old.
 1 (0%)  
 Whatever. No. Let the bridge be the bridge. Let the neighborhood transition itself to match the bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Again, safety first and looks second. I'm not really qualified to judge which bridge is the most architecturally sound. I can only pick the bridge by which one looks the best, and that one may not be the one that works the best.
 1 (0%)  
 The bridge will be above and separated from the Gateway "neighborhood" if such actually exists. There is insufficient information in the renderings provided to determine the effect on Tremont.
 1 (0%)  
 alll are frankly uninspiring! this is our money. spend it in a way that is forward thinking and inspiring
 1 (0%)  
 Altough I prefer bridge C, compared with the classic architechture of Tremont and the Gateway district, it is somewhat distracting. Bridges A & B melts into the surroundings.
 1 (0%)  
 i'm neutral on this topic. tremont is old-school, and bridge c is not, but i think the concept of "bridge" connecting old to new - tremont to gateway - is perfect.
 1 (0%)  
 Why? Seriously why? And even so, none of these bridges comes close to respecting either of these areas.
 1 (0%)  
 B and C are just to over powering for the surrounding neighborhoods visually.
 1 (0%)  
 When I am in Tremont and in Gateway, I am impressed with the lighting of the bridges and the architect of the skyline. Bridge C may change this attitude, its a fun risk, but a risk.
 1 (0%)  
 Both area are historically significant and groundbreaking. The only way to honor such areas is with a groundbreaking bridge over a rather worn out style and Bridge C will be a great sight to pedestrians in gateway and an awesome to residents sitting in their backyard in tremont to look up at.
 1 (0%)  
 I cant tell which bridges would best suite this request.
 1 (0%)  
 Not familiar with the areas, and cannot answer in full honesty about this question.
 1 (0%)  
 Again, boring, boring, boring
 1 (0%)  
 Same comment as G except, for why are they cluttering up the view of Jacobs Field and Downtown by putting those arches on C? I guess it's supposed to be someones idea of a poormans gateway to Gateway. Keep trying guys.
 1 (0%)  
 Since these places are still updating themselves and trying to increase popularity, Bridge C would help put them over the edge and make an excellent addition to a fresh new look.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has a classic design that meshes well with both Tremont and Gateway. Tremont, with its trendy restaurants and shops is still has a classic visual appeal. An environmentally friendly classical design would most replicate the traditional neighborhood and its progressive ideals. The Gateway district also has a more traditional look (though it would probably mesh well with either Bridge A or B).
 1 (0%)  
 In the pictures you are unable to tell where the bridge goes, and where it will land
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C meets this criteria the best.
 1 (0%)  
 Well since ODOT fucked over Tremont by denying it a bike lane, why would you give a shit about how it touches down there? Bridge C invokes the gateway district on the one end where it looks like a bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 A is an attractive, clean look. B is too basic, lacks personality C intrudes on the skyline, too loud
 1 (0%)  
 I think Overall Bridge A would compliment tremont and looks good with the Gateway complex.
 1 (0%)  
 Rigid, and obviously supported structures are not respectful. The engineers can design structures that appear to defy logic in today's computer FEM and FEA. Downtrodden neighborhoods should not be used as examples.
 1 (0%)  
 Again un-real views of the existing lighting and neighborhoods are presented in the pdf's so hard to judge.
 2 (1%) 
 
 See comments on Question A.
 1 (0%)  
 See Comments for Question A
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is the only option that even addresses this. ODOT doesn’t show the Tremont side well, but if Bridge C has put effort forth like it has on the Gateway side, it is perfect. Cleveland needs more than an ordinary bridge, with the above roadway arches, Bridge C is most appealing to me.
 1 (0%)  
 I think its a perfect design and NOT overwelming like Bridge C
 1 (0%)  
 See previous answers, Bridge A design definitely kept this mind.
 1 (0%)  
 They all do. I just prefer the look of A.
 1 (0%)  
 See comments in A.
 1 (0%)  
 no details to evaluate this question
 1 (0%)  
 The arches themselves reflect the whole concept of "Gateway".
 1 (0%)  
 very nice appearance
 1 (0%)  
 Given the views provided this question is unanswerable.
 1 (0%)  
 A and B don't appear to treat Tremont and Gateway any differently than the rest of the valley. C does a great job at Gateway!
 1 (0%)  
 BRIDGE "A" PROVIDES A DISTINCTIVE DESIGN THEME THAT IS CARRIED FROM THE TREMONT DISTRICT ACROSS THE VALLEY TO THE GATEWAY NEIGHBORHOOD.
 1 (0%)  
 the look of the bridge is very appealing and looks as it is directly connecting the east and west sides of the city. very sleek appearance, yet aesthetically appealing.
 1 (0%)  
 I'm in the city enough I know where this will be, but unfortuntely do not have a lot of time to spend in Tremont, so I'm unqualified to comment on how it merges with the neighborhoods.
 1 (0%)  
 Tremont is better suited with bridge A
 1 (0%)  
 It speaks to the areas creative and diverse population in that it is top shelf in its' own beauty.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C in my opinion is not sensitive to the Gateway appearance.
 1 (0%)  
 tremont is a great area and to have a bridge built like (A) would be an asset to the area
 1 (0%)  
 The arcs of Design C do represent the Gateway district very well. But the underside of Design A is more Tremont with it's art deco columns and open, complex lattice work of struts.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A leads right into the stadium the design is very complimentary to the stadium which I would think would help with revenue on some level
 1 (0%)  
 I feel that Bridge A scales the neighborhoods perfectly; it's not too fancy and will equal the attention to the neighborhoods.
 1 (0%)  
 They all seem to reflect the modern goal of Gateway. None, however, appear to match the unique, turn of the century look in Tremont. If this is not the case, we certainly cannot tell from the images provided.
 1 (0%)  
 Can't see any connection to Tremont or Gateway.
 1 (0%)  
 THESE RENDERINGS GIVE US INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION
 1 (0%)  
 Drawings do not show this aspect of any of the three. Location is too close to Gateway to be considered "sensitive."
 1 (0%)  
 A & B look like a simple road going into Cleveland....Bridge C looks like a entrance into the city.
 1 (0%)  
 Again, see comment on question D - How are we to evaluate something when we don't have the information?
 1 (0%)  
 Special character? These are giant slabs of concrete and steel. They look like an elephant at a cocktail party. Only bridge A has some character.
 1 (0%)  
 It is too difficult to see from these drawings. I can't tell how it will affect Tremont. Gateway I suspect will be fine, but when the second bridge is added then we may have a traffic flow issue.
 1 (0%)  
 ditto
 1 (0%)  
 see above
 1 (0%)  
 Tremont and Gateway are trendy and reflect Cleveland's attempt to move forward. Bridge C does this best.
 1 (0%)  
 The structure beneath A reflects the open steel work on Progressive Field. B and C seem to have no context on either end.
 1 (0%)  
 Streamlined and a more modern approached that Bridge C offers will enhance the proactive and upbeat image the the areas are promoting
 1 (0%)  
 C fits with Gateway much better than the other designs.
 1 (0%)  
 It will be a great plus for the surrounding area
 1 (0%)  
 Images given were not sufficient to answer this question.
 1 (0%)  
 no comments
 1 (0%)  
 The Tremont and Gateway area are expressive with their art and food venue and Bridge C complements the surroundings.
 1 (0%)  
 can't tell by the pictures given
 1 (0%)  
 #3 works very well with Tremont, especially.
 1 (0%)  
 C Bridge will be something you look for everytime you drive to Cleveland. It is welcoming, inviting, it makes you think what exciting things are on the other side?
 1 (0%)  
 Will there be an exit ramp that gets us to Sokolowski's any quicker?
 1 (0%)  
 Tremont is edgy and so is the design of the bridge.
 1 (0%)  
 Exceeds expectation of character of Tremont and Gateway
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has the character to invite friends, neighbors and welcome visitors the Cleveland.
 1 (0%)  
 Again, C adds style and class to these neighborhoods.
 1 (0%)  
 The bridge gives no distinction as to how it treats either neighborhood. Disappointing.
 1 (0%)  
 The designs show no concern whatsoever for the affected neighborhoods other than to reflect complete disdain because folks on bicycles will be precluded form using the structure to access the neighborhoods.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C enhances the surround communities, can be intially thought as a trip generator into the communities.
 1 (0%)  
 C look like a gateway to the community and also adds a flare of art to an artsy community like Tremont
 1 (0%)  
 I feel Bridge C meets these requirements.
 1 (0%)  
 Tremont and Gateway would be proud to be a part of Bridge A.
 1 (0%)  
 Impossible to judge. Where are the drawings of on- and off-ramps?
 1 (0%)  
 C really reflects Tremont, in the fullest sense of the word.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A expands the view from Temont to Downtown. The renderings do not show anything for the Tremont for bridges B & C. Bridge C does make an honest attempt at the gateway District, but it may clutter the area.
 1 (0%)  
 Tremont and Gateway are unique neighborhoods and the designs are not unique.
 1 (0%)  
 Once again, the focal point of Bridge C is at Gund Arena and not thru the entire design, Bridge A is more to scale with all bridges and areas involved, and yes- B belongs in Texas.
 1 (0%)  
 There is nothing in Bridges B and C, and little in A, that shows sensitivity to the scale and appearance of the Tremont and Gateway neighborhoods where it touches down. That was my point in F. where I gave the example of HOK's design of Jacobs Field. I see no such sensitivity in these designs. Also, you have not provided us with photos of the special character of Tremont and Gateway. So it would be difficult for folks who do not know these areas well to comment.
 1 (0%)  
 The steel structure respects the steel built on Gateway and the old mills in Tremont.
 1 (0%)  
 Very hard to tell from the renderings.
 1 (0%)  
 All bridges seem to be utlizing the same base designs.
 1 (0%)  
 These are dull and unimaginative designs. Thes designs look like slightly modified highway overpass bridges found all across the USA. These 3 dull designs look like the thousands of other highway overpasses in the US - These designs look like they could come from an overpass in Montana or Nevada or Mississippis or Delaware or Arkansas or any other place since there is style to these designs. There is little that is unique about these unimaginative designs. There is "no design in these designs"; just elongated highway overpasses. NO DESIGN of these 3 will "contribute to the rich bridge architectural history of the valley". Depressingly dull designs which will haunt the entryway to downtown Cleveland for the next 50 years
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A has the best character by far!
 1 (0%)  
 See comment to question A.
 1 (0%)  
 Not even close. Has ODOT ever been to Tremont and/or Gateway?
 1 (0%)  
 Again, green space is needed- hope it comes to life.
 1 (0%)  
 Brige A is dead on accurate. Great design And would fit in very well with GAteway and Tremont areas, as well as the flats area.
 1 (0%)  
 bridge c
 1 (0%)  
 Difficult to determine.
 1 (0%)  
 Impossible to tell from the renderings.
 1 (0%)  
 Lots of discussion about this, there have been other plans proposed that would have had less impact on the Tremont and Gateway area.
 1 (0%)  
 A mixes well with the historic tremont area and the Gateway district.
 1 (0%)  
 Hard to tell. But I am going to give Bridge A the benefit of the doubt. If they were that responsive to the overall bridge design, I am sure it is also reflected in the other details!
 1 (0%)  
 The bridge seems to fit in well with the neighborhood.
 1 (0%)  
 I don't think the drawings above really show this. That being said, I think there is really no way a concrete structure designed to carry semi tractor trailers can match "character" with 100 year old frame houses in a neighborhood built for people who walk. Tremont is pre-automobile, which is why some of us like it. However, as a society we have surrendered to the automobile, lets just accept that and understand that neighborhoods like Tremont are expendable. Please stop playing lip service about "respecting" anything, this highway will plow through wherever it wants.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge design C is sensitive to scale and appearance of its neighborhoods
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C offers Gateway quite a treat and Tremont a classic approach which matches the neighborhood.
 1 (0%)  
 I simply find that Bridge A visually far exceeds the other competitors in every aspect. If I was a homeowner in the surrounding area, I would strongly campaign for Bridge A both in terms of development and enhanced property values.
 1 (0%)  
 I feel like A and B merely meet this criteria, as they really have no effect on their touchdown landscapes Design C makes a calculated effort to turn "Gateway" into exactly that... a gateway into the city of Cleveland with a signature structure welcoming people.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A provides a modern well-lit design that will aesthetically pleasing from both neighborhoods. Bridge B did nothing to enhance the views while Bridge C was only concerned about the Gateway area and abandoned the Tremont folks.
 1 (0%)  
 Designs A & B flow while having a small section of the bridge stand out in Design C just will not fit into the City Landscape.
 1 (0%)  
 The exciting design of bridge C compliments the appearance of Tremont and Gateway inviting you into the city
 1 (0%)  
 As Gateway and Tremont appear to be up-and-coming neighborhoods and seek to bring in younger families, Bridge A seems to give off this feeling much, much more than the other bridges.
 1 (0%)  
 How could we know...we don't have any renderings of the bridge at either end, and how it will blend into the neighborhoods it is entering.
 1 (0%)  
 Gateway -- especially Progressive Field -- was a cutting edge design success when it was first built. Tremont is filled with historical glory that grows as it ages. These bridges have nothing in common with Gateway or Tremont.
 1 (0%)  
 Look at the area.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C would look awesome while looking from Progressive Field or the Q or any from anywhere for that matter.
 1 (0%)  
 While Bridge C added a few arches to Gateway, they overlooked the Tremont neighborhood.
 1 (0%)  
 again, i'm eating dinner in tremont and/or sitting at an indians game. none of these bridges are going to put a smile on my face nor be inspired to say "look at Cleveland" folks.
 1 (0%)  
 The arches will not take away from gateway they will add to it. I can picture an aerial view of our city with bridge c in it. We need to make this thing sweet. The concrete that is on bridge c is nicely ornamented adding to your view from sokolowskis'
 1 (0%)  
 There is no detail provided for the on-ramp or off-ramps....how can we tell.
 1 (0%)  
 I am not convinced that anybody really cared about this. Go with the cheapest because the designs are equally thoughtless and uninspired.
 1 (0%)  
 It will not detract from the near by communities
 1 (0%)  
 No comment
 1 (0%)  
 The shallow arches and wide spans of Bridge B make it appear to loom over the neighborhoods.
 1 (0%)  
 Again, I believe that Design A considers the History that Cleveland is built on, without appearing old fashioned or behind times. I think the design is an artistic expression, as Tremont is a preservation of the old, while Gateway is the door to the new.
 1 (0%)  
 You've found the wrong place to locate a bridge. Read the Alenas proposal. PLEASE, before the harm is done and the City is effected for decades to come.
 1 (0%)  
 I think Bridge A's design is over the top over what is presently in place. So much of that arearight under the bridge is nothing but vacant lost land.
 1 (0%)  
 Similarly, ODOT needs to remain sensitive to downtown's economy & not close ramps in/out of the Central Business District.
 1 (0%)  
 B & C look the same as the current bridges in Cleveland, while A has a little bit of panache. The answer depends on if Clevelaned wants to become more modern.
 1 (0%)  
 Tremont and Gateway communities were obviously not considered in any of these drawings. Gateway, a progressive and modern entryway to downtown and Tremont with its arts and fine living were taken to concerete normalcy.
 1 (0%)  
 Tremont and Gateway are diminished by the removal of hsitoric structures near each end and by the creation of a wide "dead zone" underneath caused by these behemoth structures.
 1 (0%)  
 Only Bridge B speaks to the Gateway district with its special cable arches, which seem meaninglessly tossed onto the end of the bridge with no repetition elsewhere. The other two designs do not speak to these communities.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge C is the only design with any sense of appearance similar to the Gateway area.
 1 (0%)  
 Design A respects the existing character of Tremont and Gateway and doesn't impede on them. Design C clearly blocks the views of Gateway.
 1 (0%)  
 I'm afraid C would be a hindrance to the view of the city instead of complimenting it. Not sure.
 1 (0%)  
 You can be sensitive without being completely dull and boring, which all of these designs are.
 1 (0%)  
 ALL THE BRIDGES WILL STRIVE FOR MEETING THIS CRITERIA, IASMUCH, AS THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT. THE OVERALL APPEARANCE OF THE PICTURES SHOW THE SLOPE OF BRIDGE A MAY BE THE BEST.
 1 (0%)  
  A rude ugly interupption into any neighborhood
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge A's design is most consistent in its sensitivity to the scale and appearance of the neighborhoods and their special character
 1 (0%)  
 redundancy
 1 (0%)  
 In an earlier comment box I said bridge A matches the design elements in Brown's Stadium and Progressive Field - it complements our city. The other two bridges are not consistent with the theme.
 1 (0%)  
 Not enough of the area under the bridges to answer.
 1 (0%)  
 Bridge B is boring and Bridge C to modern. There is no way that it shows the character of the neighborhoods mentioned.
 1 (0%)  
 The design of Bridge C would portray a welcoming stature to the Tremont and Gateway communities.
 1 (0%)  
 All designs convey the same general appearance and scale to the neighborhoods touched.
 1 (0%)  
 ok
 1 (0%)  
 "A" piers look a little too bulky in the lower portions.
 1 (0%)  
 With all the rennovations bridge c would compliment the areas
 1 (0%)  
 See above. This is laughable. There should not be a second bridge closer to Gateway. Period. This is going to be a $3 billion, 50-year mistake. It's no wonder, really, why this area is viewed as backwards.
 1 (0%)  
Total: 315

19. I. The bridge and placement of its supports should be conducive to positive and beneficial future land use adjacent to the underside of the structure.

How well does each design reflect the above criteria?

  
Does not meet Criteria
Meets Criteria
Exceeds Criteria
(%)1310301533
Bridge A
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
 12345
(%)28194093
Bridge B
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
 12345
(%)1712331325
Bridge C
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
12345
Total: 1351

20. Please provide further explanation or comments regarding your selections for Question I

 It looks like plan A placed in the proper location, and I have no forcast as to why it would be an interference to anything.
 1 (0%) 
 
 on bridge C it is difficult to see any underside view or what possible benefit there would be.  With bridge B, the underside seems to be useless due to the rock, but with bridge A it appears to be beneficial to pedestrian use.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Really no difference of opinion here, since the base supports look similarly spaced distance and height wise.
 1 (0%) 
 
 It would blend well with future projects in that area very pleasing to the eye.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The standard supports for all 3 bridges provide plenty of space for future land use.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridges B and C supports look fine...perhaps it's just the fact that their pictures from their presentations don't include any green space like Bridge A does.  Bridge A just looks like it's taking it's surroundings into consideration a bit more.
 1 (0%) 
 
 This is almost a rewording of Criteria G.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I'm not a building contractor, so they all look good to me.
 1 (0%) 
 
 There are very few poitive and beneficial land uses under a highway bridge.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Cannot really tell from design pics, but there should be a plan for that.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Junk all designs...............start fresh
 1 (0%) 
 
 All see fine in this regard.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Interesting appraoch, I like it.
 1 (0%) 
 
 all of them seem to meet this criteria.
 1 (0%) 
 
 All three do a good job here. Design B may be distracting for future development, but this seems like a minor issue.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The materials provided to the public fail to show this.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C has a fresh appearance, not what Cleveland is. We need fresh designs to make Cleveland stand out, not look the same as it always has.
 1 (0%) 
 
 they seem about the same on this
 1 (0%) 
 
 All of the bridges seem to have a solid design while still allowing for use of the areas underneath and adjacent to the bridges.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I believe all three designs provide for that. But, again with the pleasing aesthetic design of Bridge A along with the dramatic nighttime lighting, I feel this design would provide a better looking "framework" for any land use below.
 1 (0%) 
 
  Difficult to determine based on simplestic renderings.
 1 (0%) 
 
 All will need supports and all areas underneath will need to work around these. This depends more on those developing the land rather then the bridge builders.
 1 (0%) 
 
 They all look fine. Although it looks like there is a solid wall under Bridge C that blocks the view under the bridge toward the valley.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A boring bridge is depressing.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C keeps its supports above. Bridge A will take up some space below, but will keep the same well lit and with a nice view considering it is under a bridge. Bridge B looks like it will resemble the serviceable, but drab, Route 2 Bridge.
 1 (0%) 
 
 All of the bridges seem to meet this criteria.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I feel all of the designs met the criteria conducive for positive change without impeding future land use.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Don't really know
 1 (0%) 
 
 Not enough renderings to adequately answer this question (or most of the questions for that matter).
 1 (0%) 
 
 It's hard to tell, but it looks like B has the least amount of supports, then C, then A. But will any of them have a small enough amount of supports to make the land underneath really usable?
 1 (0%) 
 
 By nature of being an arch, C meets these needs.
 1 (0%) 
 
 They seem to address this well. Again, we're at the mercy of the renderings and the angles they chose to communicate. But they do seem to address this.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Again, I am not a civil or structural engineer, so on its face I cannot evaluate the differences in the plan.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I think the placement of the supports should focus on safely supporting the bridge. Again if people want to use the under the bridge they know what they are getting into.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge B's columns are less intrusive
 1 (0%) 
 
 I don't have enough information to answer this question. I assume they all meet this.
 1 (0%) 
 
 this actually promotes land usage and open up territory for useage
 1 (0%) 
 
 how can we answer this question without seeing further info?
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C has the narrowist structure underneath, Bridge B has the next, while Bridge A seems to be hardest with the most supporting structure underneath.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The bridge should a have bicycle path.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Again, do not know enough of the design to comment
 1 (0%) 
 
 It seems all the bridges have generally similar arrangements and take up similar area.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Can't think of any way to improve
 1 (0%) 
 
 All designs seem to have a small footprint with their spaced out piers.
 1 (0%) 
 
 All do a good job.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A shows landscaping underneath. The other bridges don't.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Liking the oval side columns it a great new look and support is different then any in Cleveland the underside looks clean and well designed
 1 (0%) 
 
 Without information on the span between the supports I cannot objectively answer this question.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Uses the amount of land at hand to the most benifit to all involve.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The large spans of Bridge C allow for the most land use in the future
 1 (0%) 
 
 all about the same
 1 (0%) 
 
 ???????????
 1 (0%) 
 
 I assume all three designs can be adjusted sufficiently to meet this criteria equally.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Not enough info.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I see no problems with either/all designs in this aspect.
 1 (0%) 
 
 i was hoping to see something more extreme but number three really makes a strong statement.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C has the fewest underlying supports leaving ample room for other infrastructure below.
 1 (0%) 
 
 They all appear to be sufficient in this regard. Hard to tell from just three drawings.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The support colums are seperated enough as not to block views of the lake, river and park and wide enough to allow a good flow of pedestrians.
 1 (0%) 
 
 There doesn't appear to be any major difference in the design of the support structures at the ground base, at least none that can be discerned from the posted renderings. The additional points to Bridge A results from the designs sensitivity from the underbelly view.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The supports are all of the same design and width for all three bridges. No comment needed.
 1 (0%) 
 
 This would have the most room under it.
 1 (0%) 
 
 n/a
 2 (1%) 
 
 Bridge C appears to leave the most open space adjacent to the underside of the structure
 1 (0%) 
 
 What possessed someone to include this criteria? Parking lot attendees? Under the bridge - heck we can't figure out what to do with far more prime space than under a bridge.
 1 (0%) 
 
 How can that be determined from the pictures?
 1 (0%) 
 
 too bad so many historic buildings will be impacted
 1 (0%) 
 
 B appears to be using less supports interfering less with that land under the bridge.
 1 (0%) 
 
 All structures appear to have a greater span between pillars that the current bridge so that's good. Bridge C and B have the thinest profile giving a cleaner look and greater clearance. Bridge A is fat and old.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Didn't see much demonstration of this, but I'm sure they are placed where needed.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridges A and B aboth have simplistic support structures, according to the artist rendering. Their impact at ground level is no more intrusive than the current bridge. Bridge C does not show the understructure, so, it is not fair to comment on it.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Plenty of land use will be available.
 1 (0%) 
 
 they all look about the same to me for future use
 1 (0%) 
 
 What does it matter to a bunch of piles of dirt? I understand the space below is historically a "business" district. The future of the Cleveland flats depends on how the space below these bridges grows.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I feel s all three designs can make use of the surrounding land.
 1 (0%) 
 
 See above.
 2 (1%) 
 
 Plenty of space for other buildings, walkways, bike paths, whatever.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The pictorial designs indicate Bridges A and C provide adequate space for some use underneath. All suggest a respect for the adjacent lands.
 1 (0%) 
 
 What future use?
 1 (0%) 
 
 See my previous comments above.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Can't determine
 1 (0%) 
 
 All appear equal.
 1 (0%) 
 
 obvious. forethought is a must.
 1 (0%) 
 
 In the drawings Bridge A's designers showed what they envisioned going beneath the bridge the best. The other two designs seemed to not consider how the land underneath would be used at all. Bridge a's designers' were willing to have a vision.
 1 (0%) 
 
  Yes
 1 (0%) 
 
 I would like to see pedestrian \ bike lanes under the deck. Possible access at each exit\entry lane to allow access to community.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A looks like the best bet for future land use.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Supports have to go somewhere and so will always be in the way of something.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I assume this was taken into consideration with all 3 designs.
 1 (0%) 
 
 They all seem to utilize similar foundations
 1 (0%) 
 
 In spite of the redundant nature of these questions, I will once again state that bridge A offers the most in aesthetics, and seems to offer the most flexibility in maintaining the existing path of the bridge and continued land use adjacent and under.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I prefer Bridge C.
 2 (1%) 
 
 Again you guys are asking questions that are not going to be answered to the best possible degree. I think that if the supports are there for the bridge and its safe, you can build around them. I think from the pictures, Bridge A will be better for this question. It looked like there was only 3 support for this. I like the picture of this. I think A will be a good contender for this.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A nice long spans. B and C look like causeway bridges.
 1 (0%) 
 
 All meet the criteria.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I would be more concerned the supports were placed to do the job of keeping everyone SAFE. The future land use can always work around it.
 1 (0%) 
 
 See H response, please.
 1 (0%) 
 
 All the bridges achieve this.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I find it hard to ever see any development taking place below these bridges, regardless of their design.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Failed again. Although, I must admit, these designs probably do provide for additional space to stockpile sand, stone & other aggregates for future ODOT road projects.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I'll give you this one. There looks to be plenty of space for future land use.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Again, they all more-or-less have the same footprint.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Don't know, since detailed drawings are not availble. In general I agree with the concept
 1 (0%) 
 
 It will not be an eyesore.
 1 (0%) 
 
 They all look roughly the same here
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A's supports look large and heavy making for less space adjacent to and under the structure. Bridge B and C's supports look thin and airy, making for more space adjacent to and under the structure.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A will provide a touch of both strength and lightness.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Once again the designs show no details or info about the land underneath.
 1 (0%) 
 
 OVERSPANNING ol *$*@*X*@ which is REVERTING back to MotherNature,etc.etc. THE WHOLE OUTPUT of the Valley DOESNT = value of the bridge $ cost..least for 2 +yrs worth...SHAME bout the ol gas station..IS a NICE one..EVEN SADDER poo biz like Stripmatic stuck moving..MODERN bldg... DOES speak VOLUMES THAT bridge THAT busy WHILE OTHERS...WHA say bout WHO comes from WERE n works WERE..
 1 (0%) 
 
 I just figured this out - bridge c and b are the same, c just has arches! As far as underside placement, a still is the clear winner, as both part of and complement to the land.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I hope the architects looked at the above criteria before designing. My vote lies on their good judgement. (I really like Bridge C)
 1 (0%) 
 
 All 3 look like it would be conducive to positive and beneficial future land use.
 1 (0%) 
 
  "A" would create too much shadowing with the complex curves underneath based on placement and angle of sunlight.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Compare to projects in other cities, we could have done better.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The bottom of design B is very plain and does not lend the underside of the structure to something very appealing.
 1 (0%) 
 
 couldn't make a fair judgement from information (pictures) provided.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Again, it looks great from the bottom. When we look at the bridge, we will have to tell everyone to go underneath to see how great it is. I have never heard of a bridge where the bottom is more important than the top in design but hey lets spend $ 450 million and tell everyone how great the bottom is. Way to go Ohio and Cleveland.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Hard to tell from slides but there seems to be more supports, thus less usable space with A
 1 (0%) 
 
 best of the 3 ~ wish it were more dramatic like the new bridge in toledo
 1 (0%) 
 
 B & C seem to have fewer supports across the expanse, so they may help with land use and again B looks nice from below, but I don't know about the other two since there's no view of them. I think A is far more aesthetically pleasing from either side with the open arches. It's hard to say how many more supports it has and whether they would be limiting to land use.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Just some pillars I guess.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Hard to tell when there's nothing but industrialism under the bridge. And my assumption is that Forest City will eventually get their way and build a giant casino under the bridge.
 1 (0%) 
 
 This is almost the same fucking question that was asked in G, you could have put the two together. Fucking retards.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A at least gives a rendering of this while bridges B and C make us try imagining what they might offer.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A does this best.
 1 (0%) 
 
 i suspect soil conditions dictate that.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The supports of Bridge A are to clunky/chunky looking. If they need to stay that way to support structure, then so be it.
 1 (0%) 
 
 C looks awesome, and A looks pretty cool. B is boring.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Due to its dual span, Bridge B would require more land for the bridge, with less available for other uses. Bridge A would be acceptable, but Bridge C's use of support cables would seem to require less land use for its supports.
 1 (0%) 
 
 It needs a base to support it and the suspension element is overdone.
 1 (0%) 
 
 N/A
 1 (0%) 
 
 Since I cannot see the whole bridge on any of the options, I can't evaluate this.
 1 (0%) 
 
 All of the Bridges have space that can be used for buildings or other types of structures under there road decks.
 1 (0%) 
 
 As long as the land area underneath the bridge is not in a flood zone.
 1 (0%) 
 
 From what little can be seen...
 1 (0%) 
 
 alll are frankly uninspiring! this is our money. spend it in a way that is forward thinking and inspiring
 1 (0%) 
 
 not applicable to me - the pdf would not load. so i don't know wha the supports look like.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Not certain what this question is asking but the bridges look good
 1 (0%) 
 
 Again Suspension bridge require the least square footage of land contact under the span and therefore the best availability for future use of said land.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I cant tell which bridges would best suite this request.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Supports on all three seem to be not too massive and there are not too many of them. All three are fine in this regard.
 1 (0%) 
 
 They all seem to meet the criteria.
 1 (0%) 
 
 While Bridge A & B are too traditional for my tastes, all three bridge designers have successfully exceeded this criteria. I think all three give brilliant opportunities to future land use.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I think that a smaller overall width is important to utilization of the land beneath the bridge. Bridge A and C appear identical in this aspect.
 1 (0%) 
 
 not sure
 1 (0%) 
 
 Its a bridge, you have to have supports somewhere. No matter how fancy you make the question, there is nothing you can do with where the supports have to go.. So why ask
 1 (0%) 
 
 No comment.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridges B &C have very bland undersides. Bridge A has very different and pleasant underside to promote future land use.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A is an attractive, clean look. B is too basic, lacks personality C intrudes on the skyline, too loud
 1 (0%) 
 
 Since they all look like they will have pillars then I think the question would be that they would all meet this.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Engineers can use ONE SOLITARY SUPPORT in the middle of the span if they wanted to. None of these three designs suit this revolutionary thought!
 1 (0%) 
 
 None of the existing under bridge land use is shown so cannot judge.
 2 (1%) 
 
 See comments on Question A.
 1 (0%) 
 
 See Comments for Question A
 1 (0%) 
 
 Not enough info. I scored Bridge C 5 only because it is so strong in the other categories.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Looks like there would be plenty of space for the bridge as well as the community to use area below.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I don't know what the plans are for the future. I think all will be adaptable.
 1 (0%) 
 
 See comments in A.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The drawings seem to show more open area under Bridge C.
 1 (0%) 
 
 There appear to be to many supports or they are to substantial in Bridge A
 1 (0%) 
 
 im not sure of the underside struct
 1 (0%) 
 
 Given the views provided this question is unanswerable.
 1 (0%) 
 
 BRIDGE "A" IS THE CLEAR WINNER PROVIDING A VISUALLY INTERESTING BRIDGE DESIGN FROM BELOW.
 1 (0%) 
 
 there is room for growth
 1 (0%) 
 
 The bridges appear to be supportative of both the Cuyahoga River and valley as well as the travel-ways above.
 1 (0%) 
 
 the illustrations are not enough information to answer this question accurately.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I like this design because it looks a lot more supportive than the others
 1 (0%) 
 
 I like that bridge A does not have any supports in the water there for allowing for clean lines and easier use of the river and land around it
 1 (0%) 
 
 I feel that Bridge A is the better choice because it will draw more attention to the fellow neighborhoods without the bridge costing too much.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The bridges all have similar double stand piers but Bridge C has the additional arches which seem to use up so much more space than Bridges A & B.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I don't think we can really tell this from the pictures provided.
 1 (0%) 
 
 THESE RENDERINGS GIVE US INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION
 1 (0%) 
 
 This can not be determined from information provided in the renderings
 1 (0%) 
 
 Ditto
 1 (0%) 
 
 A provides a feeling of more openess. B and C look too confining of the space under the bridge
 1 (0%) 
 
 They are all fine and minimally intrusive.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I worked for 10 years in the Columbus-Scrantion Road area. I can not see how these bridges would be in the way of development. I always thought that the area should just be a park land/wet land. The land is not stable enough to do a lot of building or development...it will just end up in the river.
 1 (0%) 
 
 ditto
 1 (0%) 
 
 see above
 1 (0%) 
 
 Not enough information...no plan of the footprint is presented for any of the designs.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Not enough detail shown.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Similar pillars on all designs.
 1 (0%) 
 
 All designs seem to have same basic footprint.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A suspended bridge could potentially free up usable area under the bridge, but this was not one of the available design options. All three do nothing more or less than what is there now.
 1 (0%) 
 
 no comments
 1 (0%) 
 
 Hopefully, industry will reinvest and the old abandoned buildings will be cleared for vital veins of growth and development.
 1 (0%) 
 
 can't tell by the pictures given
 1 (0%) 
 
 not sure I understand how i can be explaining this. #3 appears to be the best bridge.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Those piles of limestone along the river will do fine either way.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Meets or exceeds the criteria.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Great design
 1 (0%) 
 
 Looking at the pictures given of all 3 bridges I feel bridge C gives the most positive & benefical area to the underside of the structure.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A has a friendly, clean and future feel that would bring visitors to carefully chosen land use.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A and B meet the criteria, but seems they have developed the land for use already, while Design C is leaving it as the salt mines which can always be used for something else in the future Seems they put the monet into the bridge design which i guess was the main gaol of designing the job
 1 (0%) 
 
 Unable to determine a response by the information provided. Disappointing.
 1 (0%) 
 
 This criterion is a joke. Look at the renderings. It appears that ODOT has opened salt mines beneath B and C. Bridge A is the only one which reflects any green space near or around the structure. Noen of the information provided reflects how one might access the area beneath the structure. We know it cannot be done by bicycle.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C will enhance the value of the Land within view of the bridge.
 1 (0%) 
 
 All of the designs will be conducive, positive, and beneficial for future land use, but A and B are just better.
 1 (0%) 
 
 It is not really possible to determine this from what has been presented.
 1 (0%) 
 
 B seems like it is covering a lot of land
 1 (0%) 
 
 I feel Bridge C meets these requirements.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The supports of Bridge A add to, and do not interfere with land use under and around it.
 1 (0%) 
 
 all three seem to have equally spaced concrete piers.
 1 (0%) 
 
 See comment on H.
 1 (0%) 
 
 It is unclear from the images, but it appears that A and C provide for spaces below the structure.
 1 (0%) 
 
 all the bridges appear to have the same footprint.
 1 (0%) 
 
 All three bridges have land use potential. Bridge A took this into consideration with their renderings.
 1 (0%) 
 
 All will and should give green space at the bottom of the columns.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A is the only one that shows positive use of the land.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Cannot tell from the renderings.
 1 (0%) 
 
 All bridges seem to be utlizing the same base desings base on the renderings.
 1 (0%) 
 
 who wants to be under a really long and dull overpass-like bridge? - this is definitely NOT like being near the SF Golden Gate Bridge, the SF Bay Bridge, NYC's GW Bridge, NYC's Brooklyn Bridge, etc
 1 (0%) 
 
 Who can tell from these drawings?
 1 (0%) 
 
 Cannot tell from images of Bridge C
 1 (0%) 
 
 I suppose that they've done ok with this aspect of the design process
 1 (0%) 
 
 All 3 seem to meet this criteria
 1 (0%) 
 
 All three bridges are capable of this criteria, I think bridge B&C are very plain and simple in design. Not a positive.
 1 (0%) 
 
 c is the best
 1 (0%) 
 
 Again, very difficult to tell based on the renderings.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I think that we need to re-consider the desgin process, from what I have seen and read there is not much consideration given to future use of the land under or near the bridge -- especially need to keep in mind the extension of the towpath and CV Scenic Railroad to downtown.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Its hard to tell without seeing the location of each pier.
 1 (0%) 
 
 hard to tell from the images. Don't know about the below, but I would hate to be on top of the bridge when the gails of November come slashn'. ODOT, how many lanes are you going to have to shut down when the ice build-up comes? I can read the PD headline - ODOT deathcicles.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I think the design of bridge would benefit the area.
 1 (0%) 
 
 It looks pretty barren under all 3. I would like to know what businesses will want to be there. Maybe they could plant some flowers. Again, perhaps your offices could relocate there.
 1 (0%) 
 
 it will do so
 1 (0%) 
 
 Again, I think the design of Bridge A extends itself far greater to land development and use to the community than B or C. The arches on B would be annoying to the surrounding neighborhoods because they would always be clearly visible while Bridge A becomes part of the landscape which is a large part of the goal of any architectural structure.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I see no real difference in the designs with the renderings given. Maybe with a more detailed rendering of specific pier placements, some differences could be appreciated.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A provides lighting and landscaped areas beneath the structures. Bridge B has nice port-o-johns and Bridge C evidently uses the land as a waste area.
 1 (0%) 
 
 If B & C allow for this, the pictures do not seem to reflect it.
 1 (0%) 
 
 who knows...there are not pictures of every bridge support in the renderings....
 1 (0%) 
 
 From what I can see in the pictures, the bridge supports support the bridge. Only. There is no "snappy dialog" with surrounding structures or environments.
 1 (0%) 
 
 They all provide that.
 1 (0%) 
 
 B and its segmental design fits the bil here the best.
 1 (0%) 
 
 again, cannot comment on this criteria due to pics presented. not enough information or photos to support the question
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge c is the perfect balance between function and asthetics.
 1 (0%) 
 
 yawn....no one will pause to reflect on any of these bridges....
 1 (0%) 
 
 Really?
 1 (0%) 
 
 I would also have considered an "At Grade" Option where it can be placed on a fill, or sloped to be at grade. Cheaper solution to design and construct, and access to the area would be easier for buisiness. Consider long term maintenance of the bridge with a shorter length. Lose a little space, but compared to the cost of the bridge, might be worth it in the long run. If it is built on a fill section access tunnels such as precast tunnels can provide acess to each side if needed.
 1 (0%) 
 
 It seems that the expanses of land under Bridge A would allow for future use.
 1 (0%) 
 
 How can foundations for 2 bridges be considered a good use of land. The impact is greater -- it creates more problems.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The complexity of these questions is very redundant.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The supports are nice concrete posts; need I say anymore.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Again, the removal of historic buildings is a negative. At the east end, the remnants of the old viaduct could have been highlighted or incorporated into a pedestrian/biking component of the new span.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The pier locations were pre-determined.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The greenspace designed as part of Design A demonstrates a commitment of the design build team to providing for positive beneficial land use.
 1 (0%) 
 
 How can we tell from three pictures?
 1 (0%) 
 
 THE PLACEMENT OF SUPPORTS INDICATE THAT ALL THE BRIDGES MEET THIS CRITERIA
 1 (0%) 
 
 City planners need to talk to that.
 1 (0%) 
 
 This would be better handled by a single bridge
 1 (0%) 
 
 The Bridge A supports are placed to be most conducive to positive and beneficial future land use adjacent to the underside of the structure.
 1 (0%) 
 
 See Comment box G
 1 (0%) 
 
 Hang the bridge from a SKYHOOK-duhhhhhhhhhhh
 1 (0%) 
 
 I can't really comment on the placement of the piers because these are only drawings and not plans. I imagine the cable stay portion isn't going to save many piers since it is so short and only one span has this feature. Bridge A could have the potential to reduce the number of piers because it could provide for longer spans, so I imagine bridge A would have the least impact in terms of number of piers.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Not enough of the area under the bridges to answer.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Once again, as in pedestrian use; Bridge design C would allow for beneficial land use under the structure.
 1 (0%) 
 
 All designs are as good as can be garnered for this aspect.
 1 (0%) 
 
 There would be plenty of room under bridge c for all of the above
 1 (0%) 
 
Total: 261

21. J. Treat side, under, and above deck views with comparable effort and attention as global views.

How well does each desgin reflect the above criteria?

  
Does not meet Criteria
Meets Criteria
Exceeds Criteria
(%)1312231635
Bridge A
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
 12345
(%)37243162
Bridge B
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
 12345
(%)2115221429
Bridge C
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
12345
Total: 1351

22. Please provide further explanation or comments regarding your selections for Question J

 I completely agree with plan A's bridge design, and I think it more than exceeds those guidelines.
 1 (0%) 
 
 C bridge would look great during the day and night. It would show that Cleveland has class.
 1 (0%) 
 
 you cannot see the entire span of bridge C.  It appears that only 1 section will be unique.  With bridge B, the bridge is pretty basic.  With Bridge A, the lighting and the side design makes the bridge look great from every angle.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C obviously has the jutting 'arches' as I keep calling them that reach out, and like all other bridges with some type of above-platform decor, this helps nicely with C's global view from all sides as described in the criteria.  A and B from top and side appear flat, except for underneath where the support is directly under the platform.  This truly the only noticeable difference, except A appears to have a small 'rail' on each side.  From car, or air, C would be noticed more, I would think, than the ornate fixtures below bridges A and B.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C has an impressive cable section, but it is not inclusive of the main span. Choice C would be better if it had a more impressive span, not just a small section.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bride A is the one most in design to achieve this.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The under and side views of the main spans of Bridges B and C are extremely unappealing.
 1 (0%) 
 
 They look like any other Ohio bridge. And believe me I have looked under many of our corroded bridges. Some I refuse to cross over.
 1 (0%) 
 
 no comments
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C looks best
 1 (0%) 
 
 They do look like every other highway bridge on the globe.
 1 (0%) 
 
 See above
 1 (0%) 
 
 I prefer the support structure under bridge A best, Bridge B too boring, and Bridge C - the upper structure is best.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Precisely
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge B is dramatic from the underside, but less than stellar from the side or above deck. Bridge C is dramatic on the Gatway end, but offers little interest from the underdeck view.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A has a more interesting view from all angles.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I think all three designs treat all views comparably. C provides a distinctive above deck view that the others do not. Design A provides the best under-deck view. And design B perhaps the best side view. But all are well done in this regard. Lighting will make or break any one of these.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C -- will look cool from arial views from the Goodyear Blimp when there are sports game coverage.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Dumb question, honestly.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C has a fresh appearance, not what Cleveland is. We need fresh designs to make Cleveland stand out, not look the same as it always has.
 1 (0%) 
 
 a is a little more interesting to look at
 1 (0%) 
 
 The Bridge B design is boring no matter which angle you look at it. Bridge C maximizes the above deck views to make for a pleasing statment, but doesn't appear to carry that over to the underside. Bridge Design A looks beautiful from all angles!
 1 (0%) 
 
 unsure of question's meaning or intention.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Comparable effort does not mean good design. Bridge A is best from the side or below, but does nothing for the appearance above the deck. Bridge B is universally bad. Bridge C is most successful above the deck, and unsuccessful below the deck.
 1 (0%) 
 
 From an "above deck" view, all three bridges fall short. There is absolutely nothing "above deck." Very disappointing.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A has its highs and lows. B is mostly lows. C seems to have the highest highs in its design.
 1 (0%) 
 
 All the bridge designs have made effort to represent an overall open appeal.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C offers slight aestetics from the Deck and Side angles Bridge A offers slight aestetics from the Side angle
 1 (0%) 
 
 nope.
 1 (0%) 
 
 C stands out because of the cables, but the rest of the bridge looks pretty boring. A has a neat design for underneath the bridge, but you don't see that when you are driving! B is too dull.
 1 (0%) 
 
 none
 2 (1%) 
 
 People crossing the bridge probalby should not be the main focus since we chose not to let pedestrians and cyclist cross it, and the drivers should be looking forward. But with that generic simple mind answer, I say the view from the top should be great from Cleveland. All three do this but let's leave that to the Shoreway bridge. this bridge should not hinder visibilitly of its surroundings but the bridge should stick out from the city landscape. Right now, they are not doing that. They will fall into the depths of the other bridges, industry stuctures, and the gray sky that we see alot here. Again not trying to be negative, but we need to look at the setting here. this isn't spanning the Thames in London. It doesn't have that natural viewing frame as we see in other parts of the city or state or country. This bridge is about entrance to the city, the North coast, the east and west side, and the rest of the state in the other direction heading southwest.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I think that they all share interesting perspective from differing angles.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I'm really not sure what this question is asking. If we're to look at these bridges as if the world was looking at them Bridge C has the most distingueshing look with Bidge A right behind it.
 1 (0%) 
 
 they all should have sides high enough or secure enough to withstand the worse case scenerio of an accident or for strong winds that come across/ heavy snow squalls.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Again, this seems to be a very technical question. I'm just an academic (in management, not structural engineering)!
 1 (0%) 
 
 it shows all the city in its glory, its a promotion of the ideas of cleveland and its future, too bad it doesnt have some pull overs for that use?
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge "A" has good side and bottom views where as Bridge C has good top view. A bridge combination of bridge "A" for side and bottom views and bridge "C" for top views should be used.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C has the interesting arches but it appears only in one area-it is not clear as a overview is not given if they are anywhere else on the bridge. The underside is ugly-I prefer Bridge A's under structure.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C will have the greatest treat for global views but Bridge A will have the most light seen from the sky and Bridge B seems to get lost at night.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Can not see under side views and top side views are not sufficient to comment on
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge B zero effort except for the underside. Bridge A has the best overall combined views. Bridge C beautiful arch which the city needs. Combine bridge A and C for perfect bridge.
 1 (0%) 
 
 We don't see an above-deck view of Bridge B.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A shows Cleveland's look to the future as does C's arch. Bridge B shows no thought to a signature bridge and adds just another boring bridge to the skyline.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C does all of this, & more. The other two do as well but not to the same degree C does.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I would love to take photos with bridge A in background. Bridge B is just a bridge. Bridge C at the stadium is the only interesting part.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The c design does well in showing the global views with in the over all design
 1 (0%) 
 
 bridge (c0 blocks part of the city/lake view.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The designers of all three bridges seem to have given nearly equal consideration to all visual views of the bridge; however bridge B seemed to give more attention to the underside in these renderings. The lines appear clean and easy on the eyes.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C looks like a joke top and bottom Bridge A has a classy look about it Bridge B has a slick and easy flowing design
 1 (0%) 
 
 Above is incredibly plain on designs A and B. Below is incredibly plain on designs B and C.
 1 (0%) 
 
 ??????????????
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A pays attention to all three views - top, side, and beneath. Bridge B only seems to pay attention to view from beneath, while disappearing from the side. Bridge C includes the small arch that adds visual interest from all three perspectives, and ties the bridge to the ground to provide additional interest to those entering the Gateway region.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Not enough info.
 1 (0%) 
 
 bridge a has incredible side views-under and above deck views will draw much attention to Cleveland
 1 (0%) 
 
 C is the only one that takes into consideration what is above the bridge deck. It's very nice.
 1 (0%) 
 
 as before, bridge a is attractive from all views. bridge b is pleasing from the side, but unattractive from the underside and too narrow on the deck. bridge c seems clumsy below and above but is stunning at night.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridges "A" and "B" look "utilitarian" in design, where design "C" has a bit of flair included in the design.
 1 (0%) 
 
 the bridge should be architecturally pleasing at all angles!
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A: The "V" shaped trussels is our window to our global future
 1 (0%) 
 
 Only Bridge A appears to all these issues at all. Bridges B addresses some, Bridge C doesn't show an underbelly view at all and should be dismissed for that alone. Bridge C doesn't deliver on all elements.
 1 (0%) 
 
 None of these designs really do much above bridge level which I suppose is a disappointment. But at least this way it doesn't obstruct the view of downtown either.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Would be globel statement with two sails for the great lakes.
 1 (0%) 
 
 n/a
 2 (1%) 
 
 Global view is backwards. What these designs offer is focused insight as to what is important to the design commissioning process: make the beige lawyer happy and the bureaucrats believe the people are involved. Oh how it shows what is valued. Painful to see, painful to type
 1 (0%) 
 
 Comparability of view treatments has been achieved by minimalizing the characteristics of all views in B. Design A has more going on underneath and globally but nothing on top. C has a feature in one section with nothing going on anywhere else.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Huh?
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C is the "clean" winner with both above and below features. Bridge B is just OK. Bridge A sucks one into the cluttered past.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A actually has the most interesting under deck views, but you're not going to see that in your car while you cross it. That is how most people will experience the bridge.
 1 (0%) 
 
 (First, you have a typo in this question: desgin.) I think Bridge C, overall, has better views in all regards, however, I cannot mark this a "5", as again, the underside view at the valley level is not represented.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Learn to spell. Desgin? Treat side?
 1 (0%) 
 
 "A" and "B" are the exiting designs worthy of a world clas city.
 1 (0%) 
 
 again c fits the bill
 1 (0%) 
 
 Not sure how to answer this one, but bridge B looks very plain and bridge C looks very progressive.
 1 (0%) 
 
 C has the majestic HUG as I call it that welcomes everyone driving on it. THe other 2 are just walled cement with no view, nothing special.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C design views are totally confusing - who can tell what this would look like given these images?????????
 1 (0%) 
 
 See my previous comments above.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Who wrote this question? What does it mean?
 1 (0%) 
 
 refer to A
 1 (0%) 
 
 Yes. all around good looks would be appreciated but may be not completely possible. understood.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A&C both seem to have more consideration than bridge b
 1 (0%) 
 
  Sure
 1 (0%) 
 
 Appears designerss paid more attention to this thten the global view.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A is more pleasing to the eye than the other two.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Once again I assume this was taken into consideration but unfortiunately the overall designs lack any interesting features for the main span crossing Cleveland's skyline.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A's design appears to be most consistent thru and thru.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge B meets nothing in my eyes except a slapped together roadway that is functional and nothing else. Bridge C is at least partially aesthetically pleasing above and below, but bridge A would be best, especially if more attractive street lighting is used.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I prefer Bridge C.
 2 (1%) 
 
 What is this asking???? I am confused. What global views are you guys looking for. Sorry i can not answer this question.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A&B. it's a bridge. C. Catches your eye. What city is that?
 1 (0%) 
 
 A meets all criteria B seems has weak size and didn't offer a deck view. Under good. C size boring, no under view offered, deck has arches I'm not fond of.
 1 (0%) 
 
 We are not China guys. Nor is Cleveland the US Capitol. It should stand out...but not Las Vagas stand out.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C achieves this better than any other. Gives the traveler a visual treat above the bridge. One thing to keep in mind - from downtown, the westbound bridge will be completely obscured by the Lorain Bridge - from the south side, the westbound bridge will be obscured by the future eastbound bridge. So, the underside and sides will only be visible from those on the Lorain Bridge, or those wandering around on the Scranton Peninsula or the Flats down near the West 3rd street bridge.....how many of us go there?
 1 (0%) 
 
 As long as the downtown skyline is visible, they will be fine.
 1 (0%) 
 
 How can you even ask this question? You failed to meet the criteria again.
 1 (0%) 
 
 i dont understand the question?
 1 (0%) 
 
 Go back to the drawing board. All proposals should be rejected.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A is the most regal, C is cool because of the arches. B is booooring.
 1 (0%) 
 
 More money should be spent on the top, to give downtown a visual materpiece not some minimal bridge
 1 (0%) 
 
 A is more streamline.
 1 (0%) 
 
 None of the designs give any effort and attention at all to above deck views.. How can anybody think otherwise!
 1 (0%) 
 
 Global views of what? Our bridges, our City, our people, our culture, our state? I think Bridge A would best represent our city and culture.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Let's face it................all three are roads.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge b has no character or any imagination at all. Bridge c has the cable arch, but in comparison to the entire structure it is little, and the underneath looks just like bridge b....very boring. Bridge A has the exposed steel underneath, but nothing on top, no character, nothing that someone driving over it would notice to make it special.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A i the most wholistically designed. b and c have serious issues here - b is too underdesigned, and c's arches are about the only thing interesting about it.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I do not prefer the undersides of Bridges C and especially B being too modern (not to be confused with modern architecture) I do think that all the bridges need more visual interest from the deck standpoint. Bridge B has some great visual interest in it's 2nd rendering but that again maybe to modern for Cleveland.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge "C" looks like it belongs in an oil rich country.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C definitely exceeds the criteria. It is quiet trendy and catch up people's eyes. Could be an icon for Cleveland. Bridge A may only look good from under. Nothing special from above and so does Bridge B.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Sides and top on all 3 are terrible. Nothing special on any but wow the bottom looks great. Who would say these are good designs.
 1 (0%) 
 
 no preference
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C is the only one addressing this aspect.
 1 (0%) 
 
 best of the 3 ~ wish it were more dramatic like the new bridge in toledo
 1 (0%) 
 
 Completely boring!
 1 (0%) 
 
 See above. C is boring and plain from the side view.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Picturing as an ESPN World Series game etc. Bridge A and C probably would look good on camera.
 1 (0%) 
 
 As above, only Bridge C attempts any type of global view.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge B is just fucking ugly.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Again, refer to all of my previous comments. I'm growing weary of repeating myself.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A is Best.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I just do not like B&C, A far exceeds their presentation.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Huh? John Q. Public here; don't have any idea what
 1 (0%) 
 
 C looks awesome, and A looks pretty cool. B is boring.
 1 (0%) 
 
 All seem adequate. The view of Bridge C's deck is more appealing.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Iam not sure what the view from the road will be of bridge A and B. Will there be interesting street lights? Will there be bike ways?
 1 (0%) 
 
 They look remarkably bland from all views.
 1 (0%) 
 
 N/A
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C has provided aesthetics to the bridge both above and below the roadway. Neither Bridge A or B did so.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A just looks plain ugly. Bridge B looks like the futuristic in Minneapolis, MN at night. Bridge C looks okay, just put some flowers, bushes, and trees inbetween the roadway for decoration.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Huh?
 1 (0%) 
 
 It would be wonderful if you could take the design of Bridge A and combine the Arch's from Bridge C onto it. That would be the most interesting bridge that I would like to see!
 1 (0%) 
 
 I just like bridge A the best and bridge C second best, and bridge B is completely boring.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Insufficient information is presented to make a determination.
 1 (0%) 
 
 alll are frankly uninspiring! this is our money. spend it in a way that is forward thinking and inspiring
 1 (0%) 
 
 see comments on I.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I guess all 3 did this criteria to some extent. But I'm not really certain what a "global view" is. If that meas: what will people around the world think of any of these bridges? I'd say yawn.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Cleveland global view is utterly beautiful, (the look). Every Cleveland Bridge is impressive. This is tough but I still think Bridge A is worth more than Bridge C in the long run. The 'underbelly' is just worth more long term.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I think Bridge A and C should be combined I like the underneath of A and the Arches of C combined would create the perfect bridge
 1 (0%) 
 
 All of them can be compared to current design around the world, but only Bridge C is in a class of its own and therefore a sight seeing attraction from any angle.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The pictures don't really show too much detail in this regard, so I'm going to hold judgement on this issue.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Hard to tell by the info provided. A certainly looks better to me.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I think all three meet this criteria but, again, Bridge C has a design that helps put it ahead of the other two. Bridge A & B are traditional designs, so of course they meet this criteria. However Bridge C exceeds it.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge B is too old-design looking.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A is an attractive, clean look. B is too basic, lacks personality C intrudes on the skyline, too loud
 1 (0%) 
 
 Not sure what the question is asking.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The Overpowering view of the Overall bridge. Whatever is around it, below it, or even above it, will be ignored by the curious traveller in car, bus, or airplane.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Few of the people using this bridge will ever see the bottom of the bridge. So from the top of the bridge where 90% or more of the bridge drivers will experience the bridge only design C presents any interest.
 2 (1%) 
 
 See comments on Question A.
 1 (0%) 
 
 See Comments for Question A
 1 (0%) 
 
 Definitely Bridge C!!!!!! Bridge A & B do not even address above deck views. For the everyday commuter or visitor, Bridge A & B would be like any other section of interstate bridge, the same type of bridge railing we see on other bridges, nothing special. I love the Gateway effect the arches of bridge C create, add lighting at the high slender piers and long spanning steel, Bridge C will be Beautiful.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I think A being flatter would allow a better view.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The under side of Bridge A is somewhat interesting, but its uninspiring from the street view, Bridge C has the opposite problem.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C appears plainer underneath than the others.
 1 (0%) 
 
 There is not a good view of Bridge A from the underside. I do not like the lines under Bidge B and this is the only creative thing about it.
 1 (0%) 
 
 global view of A is great
 1 (0%) 
 
 Given the views provided this question is difficult to answer.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C is the only one that provides an above deck experience or an aesthetic experience at the local street level.
 1 (0%) 
 
 BRIDGE "A" IS THE ONLY DESIGN THAT PROVIDES APPEALING GLOBAL VIEWS FROM ALL VANTAGE POINTS.
 1 (0%) 
 
 i think bridge c would be very memorable from a global perspective. People who travel to cleveland will remember it.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge B I feel is flat in every angle. Bridge A looks great from the side and Bridge C looks interesting from both the side and from the driver's perspective.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I would feel safer on the bridge. I do not feel safe at all when I cross I-480. Poor side construction.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Same as G.
 1 (0%) 
 
 It looks beautiful all together
 1 (0%) 
 
 I feel that Bridge A treats all sides of the decks proportionally without one side getting too much attention.
 1 (0%) 
 
 None of them really pay attention to the arial view. Bridge C appears to have one small detail, but it only spans one small area. Overall, they are all flat and uninteresting from the top.
 1 (0%) 
 
 THESE RENDERINGS GIVE US INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION
 1 (0%) 
 
 Above deck views are boring, boring and boring.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Same as above. Can't answer the question without information.
 1 (0%) 
 
 don't understand what you mean by global views
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A with the lighting and "y" design has an eye appeal to it that will be attractive from any viewpoint. When one is on the bridge nothing will be noticed. That is my main complaint about bridge A. Bridges B and C just become part of the grey horizon.
 1 (0%) 
 
 ditto
 1 (0%) 
 
 C has no value under and the value to the side is only apparent at Ontario.
 1 (0%) 
 
 see above
 1 (0%) 
 
 A comes closest to meeting this criterion. B's best view is from underneath. C's only point of interest is the relatively tiny arch structure.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Knowledge of the City and some imagination is key to picturing the options above. Rendering rarely look like the final product.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C looks best above street level.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The lighting shown of Bridge A is attractive.
 1 (0%) 
 
 C is much easier on the eyes. B is a typical highway bridge.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridges A & B don't offer much for deck view of structure.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridges B & C are aesthetically poor in terms of their views from the side, above and overall, whereas Bridge A at least has more interesting side views.
 1 (0%) 
 
 global view of city is best in design A
 1 (0%) 
 
 Weather and erosion in our area are always a factor when using salt on the surface.
 1 (0%) 
 
 #3 bridge appears to do all of this.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Wait a minute. Do we use bridges for driving over or to look at?
 1 (0%) 
 
 I absolutely reflects the above criteria.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Great design
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C provides an open underside of the bridge to be unobtrusive the neighbooring areas beneath the bridge.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A itself is a global view and travelers driveing or pedestrians walking would have a global view of the city and the great lake.
 1 (0%) 
 
 C is the best in this category.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A provides the greatest structural lines which will complement the city. The other two provide nothing but painted beams on clunky pylons with pavement between.
 1 (0%) 
 
 can't really tell from renderings.
 1 (0%) 
 
 no comment
 1 (0%) 
 
 I feel Bridge C meets these requirements.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Question is worded odd, and not enough information is supplied.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Where in the designs are the global views?
 1 (0%) 
 
 B is very plain, C has a focal point at Gund Arena and shows no style for the west end of the bridge, A runs consistent through out.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The main spans of B and C are boring and would add nothing to the valley. Bridge A really lights up at night.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Cannot tell from renderings.
 1 (0%) 
 
 These are dull and unimaginative designs. Thes designs look like slightly modified highway overpass bridges found all across the USA. These 3 dull designs look like the thousands of other highway overpasses in the US - These designs look like they could come from an overpass in Montana or Nevada or Mississippis or Delaware or Arkansas or any other place since there is style to these designs. There is little that is unique about these unimaginative designs. There is "no design in these designs"; just elongated highway overpasses. Depressingly dull designs which will haunt the entryway to downtown Cleveland for the next 50 years
 1 (0%) 
 
 All views are consistantly boring.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Cannot see under deck of Bridge C
 1 (0%) 
 
 The above deck view is blah because there will be no bridge structure about the road. And no, I don't count the tiny cable stay section anything more than an afterthought rather than a design feature
 1 (0%) 
 
 hard to tell the different views for Bridge B.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A by far
 1 (0%) 
 
 Not sure what this question (#3) means
 1 (0%) 
 
 C
 1 (0%) 
 
 Hard to determine.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Impossible to tell from the renderings.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Poor, very poor in this area for all the bridge.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A wins all around. B speaks for itself as mentioned above and C detracts from the area on all 4 sides.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A addresses in a modern yet historic approach to what made Cleveland great. The other two - looks like it was the cheaper way to go, not what we want in our home town.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I think it would be a wonderful addition to the city.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Based on the drawings above, I don't know how to evaluate this.
 1 (0%) 
 
 allows full vision
 1 (0%) 
 
 To reiterate, I believe that Bridge A blends in and will provide more benefit in terms of future land use and development than B & C. Plus it is not intrusive to the surrounding neighborhoods which I believe should be one major factor in the decision.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C arches look to be falling over from the deck view.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I feel like the different designs are equal in this regard
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A provides a modern well-lit design that will aesthetically pleasing from all angles. Bridge B did nothing to enhance any views while Bridge C was only concerned about the 5% of the bridge in the Gateway area.
 1 (0%) 
 
 --
 1 (0%) 
 
 A...not boring... B Boring C Boring.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I don't understand this question.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Global views? Do you mean "how Cleveland is perceived by the world based on these designs?" If that is the intent of this question, then these designs remove Cleveland from the global architectural conversation. They are unremarkable and not the least breathtaking. They will merely convey traffic, and at worst, will detract from the Cleveland skyline.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Global view is nice; but, the local area view is more important.
 1 (0%) 
 
 does not
 1 (0%) 
 
 The goodtime doesn't want to cruise under a concrete bridge
 1 (0%) 
 
 From both under and from the side "A" is appealing to the eye
 1 (0%) 
 
 yawn
 1 (0%) 
 
 Cleveland should be able to have something wonderful that also meets this criteria. Why do we settle for so little.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I think this Bridge A is desirable from all angles!
 1 (0%) 
 
 aaargh...
 1 (0%) 
 
 Except for the small arch of Design C, the deck views all seem bland; only the side view of Design A has any interest.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The word 'design' is incorrectly spelled in the question. Good quality control is needed to minimize errors in design.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The views of Design A show uniform effort throughout the various design components.
 1 (0%) 
 
 WHAT ABOVE DECK VIEW? BORING!!!!!!
 1 (0%) 
 
 BRIDGE A WOULD SEEM TO HAVE A MORE OF AN UPPER, AS WELL AS A BETTER UNDER, DECK VIEW.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I understand You have said you want some type of ugly fencing on top of rails. those woulf block views. Another bad idea
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A's design treats all views with comparable effort and attention to global views, again, more consistently that the Bridge B and C designs.
 1 (0%) 
 
 ask the questions so that the ONLY answers serve O.D.O.T.'s agenda
 1 (0%) 
 
 The number of questions in this survey are excessive. These three bridge designs are different enough that they will generate an emotional response from most folks on first glance. I still like bridge A.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A shows strength failing in appearance in B
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C wins hands down when global views are incorporated in structure views.
 1 (0%) 
 
 They are all pretty much alike in this aspect.
 1 (0%) 
 
 There would be plenty of bridge c for all of the above
 1 (0%) 
 
 See above.
 1 (0%) 
 
Total: 247

23. K. Design should incorporate opportunities for aesthetic lighting, including the underside of the structure, in keeping with the lighting schemes common to existing bridges in the valley.

  
Does not meet Criteria
Meets Criteria
Exceeds Criteria
(%)119201742
Bridge A
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
 12345
(%)39242873
Bridge B
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
 12345
(%)2115211330
Bridge C
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
12345
Total: 1351

24. Please provide further explanation or comments regarding your selections for Question K

 I think bridge A does have some nice lighting, however I think that it would not hurt to add just a little bit more lighting to the underside, however it is hard to tell how much there actually is in an animated PDF drawing.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Both bridges A & B have the look but, bridge C drawing doesn't show many lights.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A has the lighting on the underside.  The others do not.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridges A and B seem to have side lighting, whereas C seems to appear above.  C's lighting scheme is more consistent with a few other bridges that light-up above its surface rather than its sides; however, lighting on the side, too, is attractive.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A combines the best of all of the choices, but is also unique. Bridge C's cable section is pleasing, but it is only a small portion of entire bridge. Bridge C would need a better overall lighting scheme, outside of the suspension portion.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Without compromising the view around the city as you enter and leave it A (bridge) offers all of this and more.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The lighting scheme for Bridge A is attractive. The lighting scheme for the underside of the main spans of Bridges B and C are very boring. The lighting scheme for the cable arch on Bridge C is appealing.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I believe design A gives all of the above qualities we are looking for to enhance the visual aspects of this great city as well as providing a fabulous means for transportation over the valley below.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Good night lighting can hide anything.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridges B and C lighting is fine...but Bridge A's lighting stands out - it's so beautiful.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Lighting would surely enhance the night time visual effect. Perhaps even an over all color rather than just white light might be considered.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Again, the sketch of Bridge C was not of the same underneath area as Bridges A & B.  Why not?  So Bridge C could easily incorporate lighting where necessary.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Designs not worthy of looking at during the day, much less at night.
 1 (0%) 
 
 It absolutely should, your design pics barely highlight. Make it something special day/night!!!! PLEASE!!!
 1 (0%) 
 
 See above
 1 (0%) 
 
 All incorporated lighting.  Not much excitement here - just make sure they keep the bulbs lit. 
 1 (0%) 
 
 Changing, colored lighting could be quite spectacular on the arches on bridge A.  Nothing can be done with bridge B.  Bridge C would look best with white lights shining on the suspension.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I agree with requirments and feel Bridge C is my favorite
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A has more possibilities for aesthetic lighting.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Lighting is critical, and the designers clearly took this into account. Perhaps design A offers the best opportunity for use of underside lighting due to the larger surface area to reflect light and create shadows. But all three need lighting to reach their potential.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridges A and C both provide interesting lighting schemes to highlight their best features, while the lighting on Bridge B simply seems impractical.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A -- similar to the Veteran's Memorial Bridge Bridge B -- looks like the lighting was an after fact Bridge C -- Nice and cool design!
 1 (0%) 
 
 Again, the materials fail to show this. Northeast Ohio is the largest and most nationally and internationally recognized region in our state. To the world: Cleveland is Ohio. Finally, ODOT has the opportunity to make a real statement with a monumental design that incorporates the rebirth of a historically rich city. I could not be more disappointed with these designs. The private sector is proposing and building some amazing projects around the city...why wont the state join? I just graduated from college and would love to stay in Ohio, but its projects like this that reinforce my belief that Ohio and I are just on different wavelengths. Seriously, all three designs are just awful. Build the cheapest, saving a few million seems to be the only benefit the region will gain from this project at this point.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C has a fresh appearance, not what Cleveland is. We need fresh designs to make Cleveland stand out, not look the same as it always has.
 1 (0%) 
 
 hard to tell from the pics. B seems to have some interesting lighting going on...
 1 (0%) 
 
 While Bridge A does not quite match the bridges that are already in the valley, it is a nice change from them and will be an good aesthetic addition to the area.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The lighting shown on Bridge A really stands out. In conparison, the lighting on Bridges B and C are dull.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Design A mimics the lighting scheme currently used on the Detroit-Superior bridge. but won't interfere with the lighting scheme in use on the Lorain-Carnegie (Hope Memorial) bridge. The rendering for Bridge B shows its aesthetic lighting to be much too dark to make any kind of visual impact. The aesthetic lighting on C looks good on the upper view, but it needs something down below to make it really pop.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A would atleast have something to light (the 'lace' portions). What would bridges B anc C have to light, flat concrete slabs.
 1 (0%) 
 
 All have spot lighting consistent with others in the area, but Bridge B would need the most lighting to make it more visually interesting.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A does a good job illuminating the bridge below-deck, due to the open archways, and I think it would fit in well with the existing illuminated bridges. Bridge B does not illuminate well. The cable section of Bridge C illuminates well, at least above and to the sides of the deck, but that portion is not over the valley. The rest of the bridge does not appear to have a design that will illuminate any better than Bridge B.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The lighting on Bridge C is the most dramatic. Bridge A is also admireable.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Only if Bridge A has lit tresses underneath will it look aesthetically pleasing.
 1 (0%) 
 
 It's hard to tell from the renderings just how much lighting each bridge has. More lighting is both better aesthetically and safer.
 1 (0%) 
 
 These questions were not thought out very well. You are asking the average Clevelander to answer questions which very little, if any, that answer the question are qualified (i.e. architects, engineers, etc.). Features of the bridge would have been more important for people taking the survey. Why were walking paths/bike paths not considered for the bridge. The question above that asks that it the designs reflect advanced architecture look/feel was not thought out because of lack of pedestrian paths. That might cause more Clevelanders to bike, walk or run to work which reduces traffic, pollution, obesity, etc. Should have been part of the plan.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Our bridges are ugly or boring. Not sure why you'd want to make new ones just like the old ones.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I feel that Bridge A best represents overall lighting appeal while also maintaining common elements of the existing bridges. Bridge B doesn't really represent the true nature of how the lighting will be implemented while Bridge C has upper level lighting that is efficient but doesn't quite represent itself well in regards to the underside.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Based on other lighted bridges in the City this bridge will pale in comparison
 1 (0%) 
 
 Just terrible. By the way this questionaire is a clever PR stunt in attempt to make up for the mess that was the pedestrian lane idea.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Putting lights on the cables on C would look really cool, however the rest of the bridge should be lit up as well. A would look really neat with lighting underneath and on the sides of the bridge, but there is nothing above it to light up, so it loses points to C. Again and for the last time, B is too dull. Final note...why keep the current eastbound bridge? With $450 million can't we afford an east/west bridge? I just think the old bridge is going to take away from the aesthetics of a fancy new bridge.
 1 (0%) 
 
 For cryin' out loud, keep B hidden. A could be lit similiar to others in the flats. C is begging for cool lighting. It will be a wonderous sight.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The lighting in concept A is nice. The other two look like generic lighting. Again could be the renderings.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Clearly Bridge A sweeps this category as the design would allow for stunning lighting from virtually any vantage point in the city. Bridge C, although stunning, would only appear to be so from specific vantage points. It is my opinion that Bridge A is the best choice for the city of Cleveland!
 1 (0%) 
 
 I really liked the use of lighting in Bridge A and I think that keeps in most in sync with Clevelands current lighting scheme.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Lets just hope there is enough money to keep the bridge lit, I am of course taliking about the Bicentenial brige lighting project that didn't take upkeep in mind.
 1 (0%) 
 
  I love the blue lighting under the bridges in A and B. It brings a soft and gentle look to the bridge. The lighting on C is very nice but didn't see anything under the bridge. The main focus is to provide lighting for safety of the vehicles on the road and the look from a distance by side roads etc...
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A is the most unique of the three designs. Aesthetically, I believe it is the best design and would go a long way to improve the image of Cleveland whenever video is being telecast from downtown. My biggest concern with Bridge A is how well will it last in our cold winter environment. Will the open trusswork prove vulnerable to the road salt used every year. As long as the bridge could be properly weatherized to prevent deterioration I would say Bridge A is the winning proposal. It would be worth paying a little more money if need be to add such an attractive design to our city. Bridge C presents some attractive elements. The support arch over Ontario is pleasing but that leaves the majority of the span looking like a traditonal nondescript highway overpass. Also, it doesn't seem like the length to cross Ontario would need such an arch. From the view of cars on the deck it doesn't appear to offer much support. It almost looks like some pedestrain bridges I've seen instead of a heavy traffic span. Also, having the arch over Ontario might clutter the view of Progressive Field and Quicken Loans Arena when live video is broadcast from the air during sporting events. That part of downtown already looks good without needing anything hindering the view. Bridge B is very streamlined and self contained, so from a weatherization point of view it might be a very good choice. The overall design just seems very anoymous without anything visually distinguishing about it, making it my least favorite of the three.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Only one is interesting in this regard. Bridge C plays with the light - both during day and night.
 1 (0%) 
 
 i believe that is incorporated into the design and allows the freedom for the cith to light up for the world to see, both functionally, and for the views as well.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C has the best opportunity for lighting.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A bar far has the most consistent lighting above and below while the other two seem not as well lit.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I can just imagine the wonderful lighting designers will accomplish with Bridge C. This is an exciting design.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A wins hands down. C is good and acceptable. B is not acceptable
 1 (0%) 
 
 limiting renderings showing lighting for bridges B and C but generally they all seem to be on the right track for lighting. Bridge A looks great at night if built to the rendering.
 1 (0%) 
 
 So many possibilities
 1 (0%) 
 
 Lighting the bridges is paramount and makes our city shine. Bridge A is my favorite in this aspect. But the lighting of the arches in C is also nice. B could prove interesting, but the lighting looks dim in the drawings.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A would mimic the shadowing effect of lighting on Detroit/Superior and the Bascule Bridge by the Powerhouse.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A has the most dramatic night lighting but certainly not the best daytime appearance.
 1 (0%) 
 
 You can see the blue lighting of Bridge A. It is hard to see the lighting on bridges B and C.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I think the plan c has the best show for lighting the structure for the oval side columns can be lit to a great look beyond what ever had been lit in Cleveland, each wire or what the lines are made of can be lit in different colors for the season or time of the year,or just white for an effect beyond comparison
 1 (0%) 
 
 only bridge (a) has places for effect lighting.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A has a very soothing, yet exciting lighting scheme under the bridge. The surface lighting looks traditional, and is consistent with existing bridges. Bridge B has fine lighting as well but doesn't exude the warmth of the lighting on Bridge A. The rendering of Bridge C doesn't highlight any of the underbridge lighting except near the suspension where the light floods the structure beautifully. However, the box lighting on the deck is not in keeping with the lighting schemes of other bridges in the valley.
 1 (0%) 
 
 i work under the Interstate bridge now and there is no lighting there now. Its a dark and rough area to be in. So any lights will help. There will never be much walkers at night down there except for the gangs and homeless. Sorry but that is the truth. Spend a night - all night with out fan fare to see what I mean.
 1 (0%) 
 
 This is not the kind of survey to ask laymen to complete. Leave it to the government to screw up something simple!
 1 (0%) 
 
 I think C will fit in best with the lighted arches and A is okay because we do have other bridges with blue but I don't feeel that the Blue lighting should be a deal breaker. I think but A is just plain
 1 (0%) 
 
 ???????????????
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A shows the best illumination aesthetics of the three, at least in the renderings provided. Bridge B is not aesthetically pleasing, encouraging visitors to move quickly from one side to the other. Bridge C offers the most unique lighting potential because of its arch above the deck level, and the stanchions that reach down the the street level below.
 1 (0%) 
 
 the lighting on bridge a will be breathtaking at night-the lighting on bridge c is cool but doesn't keep with the exsisting lighting schemes
 1 (0%) 
 
 bridges a and b are both designed to provide for lighing schemes. i don't believe that this is true of bridge c. one bridge feature that i really liked is the bridge lights in montreal that are part of the bridge and shine directly on the surfaces of the road instead of 30 feet in the air.
 1 (0%) 
 
 GO PLAN C!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 1 (0%) 
 
 All three bridges would look pleasurable to the eye when properly lit, Bit I believe that bridge "C" offers a more pleasing form that would look better when properly lit at night.
 1 (0%) 
 
 light the arches at it would be amazing. If the supports under the beams were faced brick from the ground half way up would really bring the tremont area in to it.
 1 (0%) 
 
 the bridge should be showcased in aesthetic lighting and be the premier bridge in cleveland and ohio!
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C is the only one that truly adds to the physical view of downtown, especially in this regard.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C has this potential along the cable spans, but the balance of the bridge looks fairly muted. Bridge A maintains a consistent artful appearance and would be especially attractive with night lighting that could change colors periodically (seasonally, special events, etc). It's very rhythmic and looks like world-class design.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A: beautifully designed, placed and gracfully in appearance to its surroundings and use of lots of green spaces. Bridge B: again mucho man/construction zone!! Bridge C: curvy cable support on deck, yet it will still be a draby looking because of its cement walls and lack of greenery near or by it!
 1 (0%) 
 
 Underlighting of the bridge balances beauty with a functional component, providing for visual inspection of the underbelly and focus on same without being offensive. Bridge A, please, choose Bridge A.
 1 (0%) 
 
 We have some pretty well lit bridges at night here. Bridge A really complements that AND goes one step further offering a modern look to the city as well.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I want a mixture of old and new to show Cleveland's progress.
 1 (0%) 
 
 You should think about all of that salt.
 1 (0%) 
 
 n/a
 1 (0%) 
 
 Lebron's already burned his bridge in Cleveland so lets not do the same with how we look to the rest of the world its all about bridge design ( C ) for me.This design has that WOW! factor that i think we can use to build on the future and beyond.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Now I am just tired of the criteria. So tired. I am sorry to vent like this but I am more sad than angry. I beseech you whomever is reading this: please lets not let this opportunity pass to change the inevitable trajectory of Cleveland, please let's use imagination, please let's invest now for the benefit of others, please stop using plastic garbage bags, Camry's and lawyers as your inspiration. Just to be clear my name is Andrew Kinnen and can be found at 216 233 8076
 1 (0%) 
 
 A is far superior. Lighting up C's wire slings next to Progressive field creates only visual clutter.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Looks like the bridge A will be well lighted.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridges B and C appear to be more easily lighted from below with cleaner support structures. Less lighting fixtures = less maintenance = less operating cost. Bridge A will be a mess of conduit and branch circuits needing regular maintenance and looking lousy in the winter when maintenance is difficult.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C is most interesting in this regard, but again, the above portion being lit would be more attractive than the under portion. Undersides are only enjoyed in photographs. Anyone traveling the bridge can enjoy views above the road deck.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Only one bridge offered an evening view to demonstrate possible lighting. I canot offer any constructive comparative comment.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I like the dramatic lighting for "A" with "C" coming in a close second. "C" is boring.
 1 (0%) 
 
 lighting up the arches will add to Cleveland's view
 1 (0%) 
 
 The lighting on A makes it pleasing at night but not as much of an impact during the day. B is more minimal all around, C looks good both day and night.
 1 (0%) 
 
 In the artists' night-time renderings, both Bridges A and C are shown with pleasant lighting treatments while bridge B looks dark and unfinished.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Again, some great lighting COULD save the thing.
 1 (0%) 
 
 LED will be the answer to cost efficency and C is the answer to beauty top & bottom.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A captures the visual interest and colorful lighting that is like other Cuyahoga Valley Bridges.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge B has nothing to light - no impact. Bridge A would be beautiful and in keeping with Cleveland architecture. Bridge C would add a more dramatic change to the skyline.
 1 (0%) 
 
 See my previous comments above.
 1 (0%) 
 
 It is very disappointing that all this time and money is being spent with so little impact. ODOT has little creativity or vision. If you're going to spend all this money then do it right or go back to the drawing board.
 1 (0%) 
 
 same as A.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C will stand out beautifully at night
 1 (0%) 
 
 Cleveland has a lovely skyline at night. The new bridge should enhance this.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A's design already considered the aesthetic lighting in it's design. The others do not fall in with that view.
 1 (0%) 
 
  Yes
 1 (0%) 
 
 Hard to comment. In closing I consider it foolish not to incorporate the abilty to add a multipurpose lane under the deck, even if it was added later. Place ment under the deck provides for some protection from the elements and is safer. If it was wide enough emergency crews could use it in a pinch.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The lighting on Bridge A is pleasing, yet is subtle. It looks the safest as well.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A provides the best possibilities for aesthetic lighting enhancement.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Lighting up and interesting design (see the current bridges we light up now) would create a grand focal point for people travelling to work, on vacation or going downtown for a sporting event. If you decide to go with the 3 designs above... save your money on the lighting and keep the bridge in the dark. Sorry to be so negative but I lived in Cleveland all my life and travel to work on the bridges every day. I do believe this bridge should make a statement. Thank you for the opportunity to express my opinions.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A's lighting is superior. The other 2 don't appear to have continuous lighting.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A exceeds in this aspect as it is the most visually interesting of the bunch. Perhaps some nicer upper roadway lighting would be the icing on the cake.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I prefer Bridge C.
 2 (1%) 
 
 Bridges A and C will enhance the Cleveland skylight. Bridge B is old and boring.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I love the lighting and look at Bridge A in the pictures. This is my absolute favorite night time picture. I love this. If you all make the bridges look like the pictures then i think A would be the best at night. The blue lights add a softer touch to it but lets people know that its there. Bridge C does not have good lighting on it. If you do go with this in the end you seriously need to reconsider the lighting that is on this bridge. It was one element you guys let slide with this proposal. Like i said before this is too much money to spend to do something half way. I think if you spend a couple extra hours and put some color into these bridges with lighting it will make the world of difference.
 1 (0%) 
 
 All meet the lighting criteria.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A shows the most attractive lighting similar to other bridges in the area of course bridge A looks best of all It's the most complete design with better angles and light enhancements. The designers obviously are pushing for bridge A.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Detroit superior bridge is aesthetically lit at night, and this bridge would light up the lake front.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A gives even and great lighting. Perfect for highlighting more so a "glowing" effect. Not bright center point.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The coloration of Bridge C affords lighting opportunities that Bridge B lacks. While the lighting on Bridge A is impressive, I don't see the value of all the extra steel when very few will be able to see it (it will be obscured from Downtown by the Lorain Carnegie bridge, and from the south by the future eastbound bridge.)
 1 (0%) 
 
 Lighting could enhance the image of both A or B, but C is unlikely. Illuminating just the arch would be insignificant, while the structure of the bridge itself would almost be pointless. Like illuminating a railroad bridge.
 1 (0%) 
 
 These three designs don't warrant special aesthetic lighting. What exactly are you looking to illuminate? If I were involved with any of the design teams I would be embarrassed to cast any light on these designs.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I certainly didn't see much of this in the pictures you have shown.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Given the lighting of the other bridges in the flat, these bridges seem to amply look like they could be lighted effectively. However, given their unpleasing design, don't waste the electricity and keep them in the dark.
 1 (0%) 
 
 B and C are OK. A looks neat at night.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Try looking at putting up an artistic masterpiece and lighting it with one of the many colors that light upo our other bridges.
 1 (0%) 
 
 They should be well lit.
 1 (0%) 
 
 By far, Bridge A exceeds this criteria. It's night shot is absolutely gorgeous. Bridge B doesn't fall far behind, though, with it's beautiful undulating visual. Bridge C, well, not so much.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Lighting the "Y" arches would be beautiful. What's to light on B & C???
 1 (0%) 
 
 Lighting under the bridge is secondary if the design themselves are unnacceptable. Lighting is easy, and obviously the more interesting architecture there is to light, as in bridge a, the cooler it will look. The other designs look like the most simple bridges with some lights on them, not impressive.
 1 (0%) 
 
 DETROIT superior,Main...THAT is part of hipchicwannabesorta maybe Yada culture n days of BPriverFest n such..THAT area doin ITS thing,etc.etc.THAT context..which is good..folks have good time..NEWBIE bridge AINT gonna be part of THAT deal.. To be HONEST..HALF SUPRISED U guyz didnt LOWER THE ROADBED dooown TO A LOWERED bridge THAT finally sorta sweepps up to Cleveland...VS.this HUGE whutever...I HONESTLY cant tell U WHAT the future will hold.. THINK PRACTICALITY,etc.etc.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Just take a look - A's got the most lighting, but a little more than the surounding bridges have. B's a little less the equal, and c needs mouch more to catch up!
 1 (0%) 
 
 Existing bridges in the valley may need a little overhauling but that is not a bad thing...that's a good thing. Right?
 1 (0%) 
 
 I was pleased with the lighting of all the bridges.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Is decorative lighting necessary on a bridge that had to be built on the governments' dime, with the extra upkeep needed for that lighting? Plus the extra energy needed to fire it up ? You've done a fine job in the past. Please just build a bridge.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The lighting shown in design of Bridge A blends well with the lighting of the surrounding bridges.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Although underside of the structure is important, it cannot compare to the above bridge deck, which is beneficial to several hundred thousands of commuters who use this bridge everyday.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The bottom is not as important as the top. Stop focussing on the bottom. What about the top when we drive over it. Will you have a screen on the road to show everyone the bottom view.
 1 (0%) 
 
 All three accomplish this quite well
 1 (0%) 
 
 bridge A's openness and blue underlighting helps it mesh with veterans memorial somewhat open overstructure at night.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The lighting shown for Bridge C is the most asthetically pleasing.
 1 (0%) 
 
 best of the 3 ~ wish it were more dramatic like the new bridge in toledo
 1 (0%) 
 
 I am very dismayed at the work you have done. ODOT has the potential to accomplish great things as it serves the needs of Ohio and Ohioans. However, this project fails to do this. It is not too late to make revisions before you commit to spending a tremendous amount of money.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A's under lighting looks the nicest and meshes with the other bridges. C's looks good on the arch, but I don't imagine the plain sides of the majority of the bridge would be very appealing even lit up.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I like A & C in most question, I would choose one of these 2 based on total price and cost of Maintanence
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A - yes. Bridges B and C - no.
 1 (0%) 
 
 All three at least attempt to light their bridges in a very staid way. How about a little color play?
 1 (0%) 
 
 Wow, more shit that should have been added to another question.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I don't take the opportunity to drive much after dark in this area, so I don't feel I can offer an opinion on this .
 1 (0%) 
 
 Love the lighting on A.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A picture is worth a thousand words or less but A seems to present the scheme better than B&C.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A has the best night lighting.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Fabulous!
 1 (0%) 
 
 For $450, you could have hired someone like Jose Caletrava to design a bridge - a statement that would be an inspiration to see and to drive or bike upon. All three designs are do not inspire - though I'm sure all will be safer so thank you for that.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I like the underside lighting on Design A. Why not use Design C (or something better, think I-280 Toledo or Bunker Hill Bridge Boston) but add appropriate lighting on sides or underside. Thanks for asking, ODOT! I hope you use public input to come up with a final design that says "WOW."
 1 (0%) 
 
 C looks awesome, and A looks pretty cool. B is boring.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The drawing for Bridge A seems to show the greatest amount of underside lighting. Bridge B seems dark by comparison, but that could be enhanced. Bridge C's drawings show topside lighting only, but it seems adequate.
 1 (0%) 
 
 First off why always blue for the underlights? Try a different color..why not red white and blue?
 1 (0%) 
 
 The lighting possibilities on the Arch in bridge C could greatly enhance the already visually stunning bridge lighting along the Cuyahoga River in downtown Cleveland.
 1 (0%) 
 
 N/A
 1 (0%) 
 
 I do not know what the existing lighting schemes look like in the valley so I can't respond.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A looks a little bit better with light, but whatever you do with it (unless you destroy it) it will always look ugly. Bridge B looks futuristic in the night, but the daylight revels its real boring old uglyness. Bridge C looks like what it is in the daylight, just more colorful because of the lights.
 1 (0%) 
 
 There you go again- framing the question with a bias to "existing designs". That is part of the problem with Cleveland overall- you people who help to make decisions- or frame the questions and criteria for these decisions do NOT think out of the box. It reflects a fundamental ignorance and closed-mindedness. Think about the fact that the Lorain Carnegie bridge monoliths were almost torn down at one point. It was thinking like YOURS that almost did that. To answer your question, lighting is a very important aspect of aesthetics, and the suspension cables offer the best opportunity to do all sorts of nifty lighting displays.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Light it up and show it off! Why does the lighting have to match anything else that's already been done? How is that going to make it stand out and be an object of inspiration and awe?
 1 (0%) 
 
 Like an architect can disguise mistakes with ivy, so a bridge designer can mask unimaginative designs with lighting.
 1 (0%) 
 
 alll are frankly uninspiring! this is our money. spend it in a way that is forward thinking and inspiring
 1 (0%) 
 
 Nighttime pics of bridge A was too similar to the Superior Ave. bridge. Bridge B was dull and boringly lit. And the suggested lighting for Bridge B doesn't do it justice. A little more zzap to the majestic span would really make it pop.
 1 (0%) 
 
 see I.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A clearly wins hear.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Love the lighting on all the bridges!
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A will be easy to ignore the accent lighting after a year whereas B will always be noticeable to those not on the bridge but not travelers on the highway. But again Bridge C takes the cake in that with suspension towers and cable offer the most significant skyline lighting display and one that can be easily adjusted for the seasons change.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I cant tell which bridges would best suite this request.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The arches on Bridge C provide an already raised portion of the bridge to put lighting on.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A by far is the best for lighting ,it's quite attractive. The others are rather dull.
 1 (0%) 
 
 All three have opportunities but I think A & B both have traditional and limited opportunities where Bridge C has extended opportunities for new, advanced lighting systems.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The lighting on Bridge A is beautiful and classic. It will not distract the eye from the rest of our beautiful skyline and other wonderful bridges. Bridge C will distract from the skyline.
 1 (0%) 
 
 None of the picture were good enough to show the view of the lighting, but kind of hard to do with only one picture at night.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge B.. Could use better lighting.. Too Safe.
 1 (0%) 
 
 No Comment.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The lighting on Bridge A is amazing and would go really well with the city without overtaking the skyline!
 1 (0%) 
 
 A is an attractive, clean look. B is too basic, lacks personality C intrudes on the skyline, too loud
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A looks consistant and well lit like the other bridges of cleveland. The other 2 seem a little bland at night and not very imagineable.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Absolutely light the birdge up EVERY NIGHT! Laser lights, computer controlled changing light schemes! It is time to be PROUD!
 1 (0%) 
 
 Fantasy designs presented so cannot be judged.
 2 (1%) 
 
 The lighting of bridge A is breathtaking.
 1 (0%) 
 
 See comments on Question A.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Lighting is phenomial.
 1 (0%) 
 
 See Comments for Question A
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C has unlimited potential in this area. The cable arches are screaming for a flood of color that slowly changes from color to color. It would be awe inspiring and a true landmark for Cleveland and the Gateway area. Bridge A, B & C will surely all have nice underside lighting, Bridge C just has the huge potential with the Arches. My vote goes to Bridge C all the way for this one.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I believe the lighting they chose in Bridge A is perfect for the design. It highlights the bridge as well as the water below. Very clean and updated look.
 1 (0%) 
 
  I did not notice any lighting in the other two bridges. I liked that the lighting was below on the first one. I looks sharp.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I think all would do well. I just prefer A.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A lighting looks spectacular
 1 (0%) 
 
 I would be proud to show off Cleveland to visitors with a Bridge like Bridge A!
 1 (0%) 
 
 See comments in A
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C with its spans fits in well with the Veterans Memorial Bridge and would be stunning if lit like that.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I stongly dislike the blue lights on Bridge A
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A - LOVE the use of the blue/purple color! Its great! Gives something more. Bridge C - just white?! C'mon be a little more creative!
 1 (0%) 
 
 beautiful bridge for Valley in A bridge
 1 (0%) 
 
 Lots of great opportunities for lighting Bridge C, including the lighting shown on the arch - can't wait to see what else they have up their sleeve!
 1 (0%) 
 
 BRIDGE "A" PROVIDES THE BEST AESTHETIC LIGHTING AND WILL FIT IN WELL WITH THE OTHER BRIDGES IN THE VALLEY TO PROVIDE A COMMON LIGHTING SCHEME.
 1 (0%) 
 
 i don't know the exact lighting, but know that with such a great design, the lighting will be right on trend with safety in mind.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I really like design C. It is too extreme especially from the drivers point of view. It would not help the skyline view of the city Design B is very common... would fit Design A seems Flow Over The Valley, and I especially like the potential of the lighting. It would not distract from the skyline of the City
 1 (0%) 
 
 I love the fact that the lighting and desigh draws attention to the architecture of the bridge and not so much its' purpose.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Same as G.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I would love to come see this all lite up I bet it would be beautiful
 1 (0%) 
 
 I feel that Bridge A would incorporate more opportunities for lighting more than other bridges!
 1 (0%) 
 
 All designs are boring and uninspiring and ODOT should add a sidewalk to connect neighborhoods and regions and make it more functional for city residents who don't drive or even own a car. You are more interested in cars and trucks driving through Cleveland than people.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The lighting for bridge A is definitely the most interesting.
 1 (0%) 
 
 only a does anything
 1 (0%) 
 
 A lends itself better to underside lighting. All the girders in B and C will inhibit aesthetic lighting.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A has a nice multi-color lighting scheme depicted.
 1 (0%) 
 
 With the interplay of beams under Bridge A, the lighting will have an appealling effect. It would probably better showoff and compliment the lighting on the other bridges in the flats.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Same as J.
 1 (0%) 
 
 see above
 1 (0%) 
 
 The repetitive elements in the structure of A best meet this criterion. C offers that possibility only in the arches, a very small element in the overall design. B seems to offer no possiblities for aesthetic lighting.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A has more surfaces to create shadows, but will require more lights. B is nothing special and looks boring. C will require fewer lights and create an interesting effect with the cables above the roadway.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The under-deck lighting on Bridge A was one of its better design elements, but this could be greatly enhanced and expanded to include other areas of the bridge, both above and below deck.
 1 (0%) 
 
 no comments
 1 (0%) 
 
 Cleveland is on the edge of developing into a landmark to be known world-wide with the expansion of the Medical Mart and we need to provide an up-to-date welcoming avenue to the heart of the city. Lets use the taxpayers money wisely! Use the tax payers money to strengthen Ohio by putting Ohio workers to work.
 1 (0%) 
 
 There is nothing quite like a light at the top of a suspension bridge. WIthout exaggerating, it will be the focal point of Cleveland City Skyline photos for years to come.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Light it like the Main Avenue bridge- it was featured on the Drew Carey Show. Now that we have "Hot In Cleveland", the possibilities are endless.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Aesthetic lighting would not be a problem as far as keeping lighting schemes common to existing bridges in the valley.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Great lighting concept
 1 (0%) 
 
 Looking forward to seeing LED lighting used within Bridge C, including lighting below and above.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A could incorporate lighting that could and should be a welcomeing entrance and complement to the valley.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Somewhat challenging to conclude with the limited phots, however I'm certain anything can be done to accomodate various lighting options
 1 (0%) 
 
 Unable to determine a response by the information provided. Disappointing.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The lighting featured for Bridge A will highlight its structural elements which adds to the cityscape. The faux-arches on C look like frozen ropes. The muted side lighting on B looks like night lights on a skinny panel. Are these really the three best designs submitted?
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A has a nice lighting scheme, Bridge C would be nice at night but the rendering at night does not represent the potenial of the bridge.
 1 (0%) 
 
  Bridge B seems to be too dark in the rendering, A seems good, and C is unacceptable.
 1 (0%) 
 
 It is not really possible to determine this from what has been presented.
 1 (0%) 
 
 As I said before, I could see C lit up at night and become a great signature bridge for the city
 1 (0%) 
 
 I feel Bridge C meets these requirements.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Lighting for Bridge A enhances the bridge and the area surrounding it.
 1 (0%) 
 
 this lighting scheme does not imitate but rather makes it's own statement of beauty.
 1 (0%) 
 
 No information about this provided.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A and C exceed in this area while B fails to provide aesthetic lighting opportunities.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A without a doubt!
 1 (0%) 
 
 How are you going to see lighting on the underside of the bridge when going on the top? The only design that meets this is design C because of the suspension beams.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A hands down, there are many schemes that can be used to light steel and concrete section, the other two designs focus on concrete beams and (1) cable stay bridge Section.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Cannot tell from renderings.
 1 (0%) 
 
 terribly dull designs that look like EVERY other highway overpass in America do not merit aesthetic lighting
 1 (0%) 
 
 Why draw attention to a common looking highway bridge?
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A, all the way.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The lighting looks ok. But, with no bridge structure rising above the roadway this bridge will have a minimal visual effect on the city
 1 (0%) 
 
 Lighting design is not as clear in Bridges B and C as it is in Bridge A. Bridge A has a design of underlighting to show the arches of the bridge and the posts they sit on, which is consistent to existing bridges downtown.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Lighting on B&C have failed in the PDF photos
 1 (0%) 
 
 bridge c is the best fit for our community
 1 (0%) 
 
 Very hard to tell based on the renderings.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Not sure what the contractors have in mind in this area.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Again, Bridge A - well thought out. The others I just don't see much there in thought. C tries with the cable - maybe that's Toledo, but its not Cleveland.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I feel the design would fit in well with the citys landscape, and add appeal to the area.
 1 (0%) 
 
 'A' provides an interesting underside aesthetic. The other two provide nothing visually exciting with lighting.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A provides a lot of opportunities for aesthetic lighting under the bridge with the open webbed beams. The other bridges are too simple and do not provide much opportunity for aesthetic lighting.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Based upon the information present, I can't really see how the designers plan to accomplish this.
 1 (0%) 
 
 It does
 1 (0%) 
 
 I think the lighting for Bridge A hits the perfect tone aesthetically and for safety. It is illuminated quite clearly for safety but elegant enough to be attractive visually. Quite frankly, I don't think Bridge B provides enough lighting to conform to any safety qualifications. Bridge C appears to be a circus show with too much light that would annoy the surrounding communities and overwhelm the existing lighting themes. It would be as if one had a security spotlight shining in one's bedroom all night.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A has a great lighting scheme that accentuates the openness of its design Bridge B stays true with the colored lighting schemes of the Valley Bridge C, I like the lighting scheme of the signature span and I think that it highlights the aspects of the design well, but I would like to see a rendering of what they plan to do with the rest of the viaduct
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A provides a modern well-lit design that will aesthetically pleasing from all angles. Bridge B did nothing to enhance any views while Bridge C was only concerned about the 5% of the bridge in the Gateway area.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Hard to tell from Pictures but this question can only be asnwered with Design A. Obviously Design A paid attention to this criteria
 1 (0%) 
 
 C allows for lighting, but is not very visually appealing. B does not even seem to really be lit. A is the only one, again, is the only one with a truly appealing structure, both when lit and when not lit.
 1 (0%) 
 
 If these are the bridge designs, I would prefer that they are not lit up at night, that way we only have to look at this half-billion dollar design disaster during daylight hours.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A and Bridge C have feeble attempts at lighting design which look more like they were copied from existing bridges than meant to coordinate. They are unimaginative and uninspiring. Bridge C doesn't seem to have any decorative lighting at all.
 1 (0%) 
 
 They all provide this.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C gives many more options, both above(arches) and below the bridge. And on the road surface itself(reflectors), for creative and imitative lighting.
 1 (0%) 
 
 only bridge A shows the potential for remarkable lighting effects
 1 (0%) 
 
 Light the arches dont take away from the bridge lighting that already exists. When the innerbelt is deconstructed we lose a bigger part of our city than most people think lets not take away from what we still have left. Beutiful steel arch bridges made up the valley. The new bridges should be the same type to steel!!!
 1 (0%) 
 
 "A" has lighting that is complimentary to the other bridges
 1 (0%) 
 
 boring ....nothing innovative, expansive....yawn.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The vision for this is so limited that it is difficult for me to care about the lighting. Something wonderful for community, the environment, and life in the city was possible and we got these three options.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A has got this one hands down.
 1 (0%) 
 
 New LED lighting...not necessarily colored lights should be considered. By the time the design is complete, there will be some pretty advanced LED lights.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The rendering of Bridge A at night is exceptional. I think it lends itself to very artistic lighting.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C is nothing like any other bridge or architecture presently in the Cleveland area. It reminds me of bridges we have in Toledo. This design would do well there, not Cleveland. Bridge B is the same concrete ribbon. Bridge A is unique in both design and lighting, yet has some of the structural integrity already present in the Cleveland area. I am no longer a resident in Cleveland. But my family is all located in this area. We return often and many times bring friends who have not visited Cleveland before. Traveling over the present bridge has always been a joke, and I would love to see it change. We still use much of the great museums, theaters, and parks in Cleveland. What an impression Bridge A would make not only flying into Cleveland, but driving back and forth over such a well designed avenue.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge A is the best!
 1 (0%) 
 
 B & C look about as electric as a pile of dirt. A actually looks a tad chic. The bottom line -- they are all boring, with A being somewhat less lackluster than the other 2.
 1 (0%) 
 
 A lot more could have been done that just wasn't considered.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I see no elements that make this case. Here was a great opportunity to hang a pedestrian/bike structure beneath or alongside the bridge to relieve visual boredom. Finally, as a bicyclist, I deeply resent ODOT bridge policy. The State Route 2 span over Sandusky Bay is another terrible example. Lorain-Carnegie is not an acceptable alternative.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge B looks like it would be invisible at night. C would look attractive during the day, but doesn't look like you'd see the arches at night. Bridge A seems to have best lighting.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Lighting is a cheap yet effective means to achieve most of the goals stated herein.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The lighting on Bridge A is exceptional.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Design A shows the best lighting package
 1 (0%) 
 
 All three designs meet the criteria, however Design A not only meets the criteria, but is aesthetically pleasing and functional while being archtecturally sound.
 1 (0%) 
 
 How about a design that has something above the deck for drivers to see? Bridge C has one little span near downtown, not nearly enough. I am embarassed that one of these three bridges will be built in my downtown
 1 (0%) 
 
 THE PICTURES OF BRIDGE A APPEAR TO HAVE GREATER LIGHTING ON THE SIDES, AS WELL AS MORE AESTHETIC LIGHTING BEAUTY ON THE UNDER AREAS OF THE BRIDGE. ALL IN ALL BRIDGE A IS JUST A PRETTIER OVERALL BRIGE.
 1 (0%) 
 
 I guess. You can light anything up. what does that prove. A handsome brige lit up is nice, but the lighting does not make it handsome. Your bridge designs are not attractive and putting spot lights on them does not change that.
 1 (0%) 
 
 The Bridge A design most effectively incorporates opportunities for aesthetic lighting in keeping with the lighting schemes common to the existing bridges in the valley.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Overall, Bridge A displays the best look and with an attractive lighting display and clean foundation. It looks good and looks to be relatively cost freindly. Bridge B is simply to "Average Joe" for what we want. Bridge C looks expensive and while the cables near Prgressive Field seem attractive, what will happen in winter when ice accumulates on them? I know there has been problems with other bridges in the area with this design. And the rest of the approach spans are nothing out of the ordinary. Bridge A is the best looking and would be a great fit for what Cleveland WANTS & NEEDS!
 1 (0%) 
 
 whats the point of answering the survey, O.D.O.T. will do as they please.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Obviously, the only underside lighting rendering shown in the three renditions was bridge A -- it has the best opportunity to show off the structure, similar to the way the other bridges in the flats are lighted. Bridge A is my overall choice.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Both top and bottom of Bridge A have many options for lighting and hiding the lighting underneath. B will continue to be plain and C? light the arch? Will sorely stick out.
 1 (0%) 
 
 Bridge C design allows for many imaginative ideas for lighting presentation and illumination.
 1 (0%) 
 
 All designs meet this criteria equally.
 1 (0%) 
 
 There would be plenty of room under bridge c for all of the above
 1 (0%) 
 
 See above.
 1 (0%) 
 
Total: 295