downtown bridge aesthetics plan
TRANSCRIPT
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
1/38
Aesthetics and Enhancements Implementation Plan
March 7, 2013
AESTHETICS & ENHANCEMENTS IMPLEMENTATION PLAN & RECORD OF RECOMMENDATIONS AND DECISIONS
LOUISVILLE-SOUTHERN INDIANA OHIO RIVER BRIDGES PROJECT DOWNTOWN CROSSING
Submitted By: Walsh Construction 100 Witherspoon Street Louisville, KY 40202 Ju
001R d f R d ti d D i i C i dd 1
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
2/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
Table of Contents
Introduction ............................................................................................................................2
AESTHETICS AND ENHANCEMENTS IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Introduction .......................................................................................................................5
From the RFP: 9.1.1 Aesthetics and Enhancements Manager ....................................6
From the RFP: 9.1.2 Methodology ..................................................................................6
From the RFP: 9.1.2.1 Commitment to Context Sensitive Design and Solutions ....7
From the RFP: 9.1.2.2 Producing an Aesthetics and EnhancementsImplementation Plan .......................................................................................................7
From the RFP: 9.1.3.1 Aesthetics and Enhancements Implementation Plan ...........16
From the RFP: 9.2.2 General Aesthetic and Enhancement Requirements ..............19
From the RFP: Historic Mitigation Requirements .....................................................19
From the RFP: 9.2.3 Landscape Plan ...........................................................................20
FINAL RECORD OF RECOMMENDATIONS AND DECISIONS
Section 1 - Surface exture Plan and Aesthetic & Enhancement
reatment Location Plan Map .........................................................................................24
Section 1 .............................................................................................................................25
Section 2 .............................................................................................................................31
Section 3 - Surface exture Plan Map .............................................................................33
Section 3 .............................................................................................................................34
Appendix ......................................................................................................... see enclosed CD
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
3/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
Introduction
D O W N O W N C R O S S I N G
AESTHETICS AND ENHANCEMENTS IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AND
RECORD OF RECOMMENDATIONS AND DECISIONS
Tis Aesthetics and Enhancements Implementation Plan (AEI) and Record of Recommendations and Deci-
sions (RR&D) is the culmination of a series of meetings with stakeholders to present concepts for Aesthetics
and Enhancements on the Downtown Crossing project by the Walsh Design Build eam (DB). Te process
was outlined in the Request for Proposal (RFP) for the Downtown Crossing as advertised by the Kentucky
ransportation Cabinet (KYC). Recommendations have been made in collaboration with the Area Advisory
eams (AAs) and Bi-State Management eam (BSM), in consultation with the Bi-State Historic Consultation
eam (BSHC). Te Walsh DB not only met the basic requirements of the RFP but exceeded those require-
ments by holding numerous additional meetings with Area Advisory eam members and interested groups
to develop consensus on solutions. Additionally, meetings were held with the Historic Preservation Advisory
eams from both states on March 27-28, 2013. Te extra meetings and consensus building with all st akeholders
resulted in a better overall product.
Tis document includes the Final AEI and the Final Record of Recommendations and Decisions. Te attached
Appendix CD includes the presentation slides, workbooks, signed workbook sheets from the AA members,
meeting summaries, and a spreadsheet that incorporated all comments and DB recommendations from each
Area Advisory eam Meeting.
By inclusion of all the documents mentioned above, this document represents a complete and accurate record
of how the process unfolded and how decisions were made on this project.
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
4/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
AESTHETICS AND ENHANCEMENTS IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
LOUISVILLE-SOUTHERN INDIANA OHIO RIVER BRIDGES PROJECT DOWNTOWN CROSSING
Submitted By: Walsh Construction 100 Witherspoon Street Louisville, KY 40202 June
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
5/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
This page left blank intentionally
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
6/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
AESTHETICS AND ENHANCEMENTS IMPLEMENTATION PLANINTRODUCTION
Te Aesthetics and Enhancements Implementation
Plan represents the Walsh DB plan to work with
the BSM, BSHC, and the Area Advisory eams to
develop an inormed, nal AEI Plan that identies all
aesthetic and enhancement requirements to be included
in the Downtown Crossing project. Proposed treat-
ments presented herein are sensitive to the Historic
Preservations Plans (HPPs) that have been developed
or the historic properties and districts adjacent to
the Project, as presented in the 2012 First Amended
MOA (FAMOA). Te HPPs will be updated by the
BSM in consultation with the BSHC. Tis Plan
also addresses other commitments applicable to aes-
thetics and enhancements that appear in the FAMOA,
as well as those in the 2012 SFEIS and Revised ROD
(and, by incorporation in those documents, the 2003
FEIS and ROD). Te commitments recorded in the
above-reerenced environmental documentation are
collectively reerred to as the Project Commitments.
In developing this AEI Plan, Walsh DB has consid-
ered the guidelines presented in the Aesthetic Design
Guidelines-the Louisville Southern Indiana Ohio River
Bridges, dated February 2006; and in the Landscape
Design Guidelines and Concepts or the Kennedy In-
terchange, dated August 2006. Tis AEI Plan includes
a Landscaping Plan that (per RFP Section 9.2.3) identi-
es principles and guidelines or Indianas Greenway
Corridor that are similar to those developed in 2006or the Kennedy Interchange. Also, as per RFP Sec-
tion 9.2.2, a set o aesthetic guidelines and principles
were developed.
Tis AEI Plan describes the Walsh DBs approach to
incorporating aesthetics and enhancements through-
out Project development. Te Walsh DB commits to
applying the requirements o the nal AEI Plan to the
design and construction o all permanent structures
including, but not limited to, bridges, retaining walls,
barriers, lighting, sidewalk/bicycle paths, landscape
enhancements, and drainage acilities (per RFP Sec-
tion 9.1).
Te DB will conduct all work necessary to meet the
requirements or aesthetics and enhancements man-
agement, including:
A.Provision o an Aesthetics and Enhancements
Manager (AEM)
B.Provision o Aesthetics and Enhancements
Graphic Support
C. Development and execution o an Aesthetics
and Enhancements Implementation Plan
D. Presentation to and collaboration with the Area
Advisory eams, inclusive o key stakeholders
E. Record o Recommendations and Decisions
Tis AEI Plan is based on the Aesthetics and Enhance-
ments Management Plan (AEM Plan) submitted as part
o the Walsh DB echnical Proposal in response to
the RFP. Tis AEI Plan:
Denes the responsibilities and authority of the
Aesthetics and Enhancements Manager.
Describes the range of options/alternatives (nar-
rative discussion and/or sketches/graphics/render-
ings) that the DBT will present to the AAT and the
BSMT, in consultation with the BSHCT.
Provides more specic details and elaborates on the
qualications, responsibilities, and authority o the
Aesthetics and Enhancements Manager to ensure
that the nished project achieves the expected level
o context sensitive design and aesthetics.
Details the role o the Aesthetics and Enhance
Management Plan Graphic Support in conv
Te context sensitive designs and aesthe
Te methods or coordinating and interawith the AA, the BSHC, and the BSM
Te ormat and distribution o the Reco
Recommendations and Decisions docu
Te ormat o this plan is to rst show requirem
rom the RFP relative to the AEI Plan to be oll
by the Walsh DB plan or that element. Followin
document is the Record o Recommendation
Decisions. Included in the Appendices (on CD
nal graphics, presentation materials, and compil
o AA and BSM comments and recommenda
While one may complement the other, aesthetic
enhancements are not synonymous. For exa
while beauty is a key attribute o aesthetic, it is
one o several connotations associated with enh
ment. Just as there can be aesthetic enhancem
there can also be utilitarian or eective enhancem
that are not beautiul or artistic.
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
7/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
Within the context o the Project, enhancements in-
clude new structures and acilities, and additions/
modications to existing structures, acilities, land-
scapes, etc.
Within the context o this AEI Plan, the aesthetictreatment o the enhancements (i.e., aesthetic enhance-
ments) is the goal that is to be achieved.
FROM THE RFP: 9.1.1
AESTHETICS AND
ENHANCEMENTS MANAGER
Te DB shall assign an Aesthetics and Enhancements
Manager (AEM) to the Project.
Te Aesthetics and Enhancements Manager shall have
the responsibility to:
A. Develop and execute the Aesthetics and Enhancements
Implementation Plan.
B. Coordinate aesthetics and enhancements issues with
the AA, the BSM in consultation with the BSHC,
and the DBs design and construction teams.
C. Oversee the preparation o 2D or 3D CAD drawings,
renderings, or photo simulations as needed to depict
conceptual and detailed solutions to address aesthetics
and enhancements issues.
Te Aesthetics and Enhancements Manager shall have
experience with developing and directing aesthetic and
enhancement work or transportation projects. Te
qualifcations o the DBs Aesthetics and Enhance-
ments Manager shall be submitted as part o the ech-nical Proposal.
THE WALSH DBT PLAN:
Our AEM, Richard Sutherland, will lead the Walsh
DB program or coordination with the AAs, BSHC,
HPAs, and BSM to nalize th e AEI Plan, culminat-
ing in clear decisions on concepts that best meet the
various needs and desires o the aected communities.
Te AEM will draw on and manage resources rom
throughout the Walsh DB or architecture, engineer-
ing, and graphics expertise. He will communicate the
nal aesthetics and enhancements requirements to the
design team to ensure their proper implementation.
He will accomplish this ormally, by distribution o
design direction memoranda, and inormally, through
his on-going attendance and participation in individual
discipline ocus group meetings. He will ensure that
AEI Plan requirements are implemented thoroughly
and correctly during design and construction.
Te Walsh DBs design quality process includes a
mandatory interdisciplinary review or each and every
design package in each phase o development (con-
ceptual, interim, and RFC). Te review by the AEM
conrms compliance with the applicable requirements
o the AEI Plan and the project scope. Physical evi-
dence o this review and resolution o any comments
must be included in the quality documentation th at isexamined by the Design Quality Manager (DQM) dur-
ing audit o the package beore it is submitted to KYC
or review. Te DQM will not certiy the package as
complete and will not allow the package to advance to
submittal i the AEMs review has not been completed
and documented. Tere are no exceptions to this
quality control process. Tereore, our quality process
ensures the AEMs engagement in all applicable details
o the design and provides the means or his oversight
rom the unique perspective o aesthetic compliance.
Our AEM will have stop-work authority in t he design
and construction process.
FROM THE RFP: 9.1.2
METHODOLOGY
Te DB shall work with the AAs and the BSM
consultation with the BSHC to develop the Aes
and Enhancement Implementation Plan. Te DB
be responsible or working with the BSM to schmeetings with the AAs and, i appropriate, the BS
and shall assist the BSM with identiying appro
acilities and producing appropriate graphics and e
its or the meetings. BSM shall provide a list de
representation o the AAs to the DB upon NP
BSM reserves the right to make changes to the ma
o the AAs during Project development.
THE WALSH DBT PLAN:
Te Walsh DB worked with the AAs and B
in consultation with the BSHC, to develop the
AEI Plan. Decisions regarding scheduling me
dates and acilities were made in coordination
the BSM. Te DB attended all AA meeting
the March 27-28 HPA meetings to discuss aest
and enhancements. In addition, meetings were h
2013 with the City o Jeersonville on March 11,
4 and May 13; Jeersonville City Pride on Marc
BSHC on March 19; and Downtown Develop
Corporation on January 28, February 5, March 18,
4, April 19, April 23, May 6 and May 21. In add
Defnitions o
Aesthetics and Enhancements
Aesthetic: Pertaining to the sense o andresponses to the beautiul; artistic; having alove o beauty; in accordance with acceptednotions o good taste.
Enhance: To make greater, as in value, beauty,or efectiveness; augment; to provide withimproved, advanced, or sophisticated features.
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
8/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
numerous conerence calls and other inormal meet-
ings and discussions were held to develop consensus
or the AEI Plan.
FROM THE RFP: 9.1.2.1
COMMITMENT TO
CONTEXT SENSITIVEDESIGN AND SOLUTIONS
Te DBs design and construction shall be consistent
with the Record o Recommendations and Decisions,
and the DB shall make every eort to conorm to the
ollowing general principles:
A. Use an interdisciplinary team tailored to Project needs.
B. Apply exibility inherent in design guidelines.
C. Incorporate aesthetics and enhancements consider-
ations throughout Project development.
D. Create structures and aesthetic designs that enhance
the connections under the highway between urban
neighborhoods/downtown/destinations.
THE WALSH DBT PLAN:
Te aesthetics team includes landscape architects,
bridge architects, bridge and roadway designers,
lighting experts, and constructors experienced in
working with urban projects with large numbers
o environmental commitments.
Flexibility was exercised during concept develop-
ment to: minimize verticality o the interchange
components to the extent possible; use o state o the
art techniques to reduce noise such as bridge jointsand pavement designs; and place enhancements
to maximize community appearance to citizens
and visitors alike, such as gateways, landscaping,
and pedestrian acilities. Such exibility will con-
tinue to be implemented throughout design and
construction. One specic example o exibility
was the Walsh DB working with AA members
in Section 1 to shi application o resources rom
Liberty Street landscaping to additional GatewayEnhancements. Another example is Walsh agreeing
to relocate the monuments proposed on the east
side o Main Street (that due to a conict cant
be constructed) to Jackson Street to complete the
Market Street and Jackson Street intersection as a
complete gateway.
Aesthetics enhancements have been applied
throughout the project development in all three
sections to date, and will continue to be applied
throughout construction.
With aesthetic enhancements in landscaping,
textures or walls, and lighting, travel under the
interstate structures will be a more welcoming, sae,
and pleasant experience or all users o t he acility.
All underpasses will receive lighting that will pro-
vide a sae and inviting experience, particularly or
non-motorist users. A two-stage lighting system,
which operates both during the day and night to
maintain appropriate levels o light or users, will
be installed.
FROM THE RFP: 9.1.2.2
PRODUCING AN AESTHETICS
AND ENHANCEMENTS
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Te AEI Plan shall:Establish a plan for presenting
detailed aesthetics options to the AATs and the BSMT
in consultation with the BSHCT for review and discus-
sion. Stakeholder involvement requirements are defned
in Section 9.3 and Chapter 8 of this Project Scope
document. Elements of t he design for which the DBT
shall develop and present options are, at a minimum,
listed below in Table 9-1 Aesthetic Options and other
sections of this Chapter and RFP.
Project
Section 2
Presentation
Requirements
New I-65 Northbound
Ohio River Bridge
wo ully-integratconcepts illustrati(See Section 9.2.1 basic requirement
Color
Finished surace trment (reveals, cham
texture etc.)
Substructure detai
ower/Pier shap
Bridge Railings (oconcept must be o
open railing)
THE WALSH DBT PLAN:
Te towers will be 5-sided, shaped like a bahome plate. Te two concepts were dierent
ower Option 1 (top) and Option 2 (bottom) rom SectiWorkbook AA Meeting #1
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
9/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
top shapes: pointed (Option 1) or at (Option 2),
as shown on the previous page and on Page 3
(ower Options) o the Section 2 Workbook or
AA Meeting #1 in the appendices. Option 1 was
the consensus choice o the AAs and was recom-
mended by Walsh to the BSM or nal design.
Colors Per the RFP, colors will be gray, lightly
colored elements. Concrete will remain natural
concrete color. Painted elements will match as
closely as possible.
Basic surace treatments will be shown in the graph-
ics; texture is planned to be smooth concrete.
Te BSM determined that a closed barrier would
be used.
Substructure detailing will be as shown in the
tower, anchor, and approach pier graphics. Un-
dersides o bridges will be clean and uncluttered
to the extent possible. In AA Meeting #1, the
DB presented three options or approach pier
shapes as shown to the right and on Page 4 (Ap-
proach Spans: Indiana) o the Section 2 Work-
book or AA Meeting #1 in the appendices.
Option 3 was recommended which was a
round pier with reveals at eye level resembling
the Aesthetic Guidelines option rom 2006.
Also, in AA Meeting #1, the DB showed two an-
chor pier options. Both pier options had hexagonalpiers but one had an arched underside to the cap
while the other was angular as shown on this page
and on Page 2 (Anchor Piers) o the Section 2 Work-
book or AA Meeting #1 in the appendices. Te
AA members supported the arched cap underside.
When the DB was considering comments
the irst AA meeting, it was suggested
since the AA had selected round column
the approach spans, the hexagonal piers
not be a good aesthetic option. Because o
proximity o the anchor piers to the land app
piers, it was decided to take the round col
or the anchor pier back to the AA in me
#2 as an additional option or consideratio
shown below and on Page 6 (Anchor Piers)
Section 3 Workbook or the AA Meeting
the appendices. Te round column, Option
selected.
Approach Spans: IndianaPier Options rom Section2 Workbook AA Meeting#1. Option 1 Hexagonal
(upper le), Option 2 layeredlimestone (upper right) andOption 3 round with reveals
(le).
Anchor Pier options rom Section 2 Workbook AA Meeting #1.
Option 1 (top) and Option 2 (bottom).
Anchor Pier options rom Section 3 Workbook AA MeeOption 1 (top) and Option 2 (bottom).
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
10/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
Project
Section 3
Presentation
Requirements
I-65 rom northend o the New I-65Northbound OhioRiver Bridge andnorth end o the
existing JFK russabutments and US
31 north abutmentsnorth to North o
Stansier Avenue inIndiana (includes
all structures withinthese limits) (Sec-
tion 3)
wo ully integrated con-cepts illustrating:
Color
Finished surace treatments(reveals, chamers, textures,
etc.)
Substructure detailing
Pier shapes
Underside o all struc-tures shall be clean and
uncluttered
Appropriate, connectiveunderpass structures orJeersonville and Clarks-
ville city streets (pedestrian,bike, vehicle)
THE WALSH DBT PLAN:
he DB provided two ully integrated con-
cepts illustrating color, inished surace treat-
ments, substructure detailing, pier shapes,
uncluttered undersides o structures, and ap-
propriate, connective underpass structures.
Te rst concept was to use the Aesthetic Design
Guidelines structure details. Te second concept is
to provide an option or an additional pier texture,and multiple surace texture possibilities or walls
and abutments.
All colors are gray, i painted, or natural concrete
color.
Te nished surace treatments are as shown in
pier reveals and wall surace texture options.
Substructure detailing is represented by a variety
o orm liner options as shown below and on page
9 o the Section 3 Workbook or AA Meeting
#1 included in the appendices o this document.
Separate detailing options are shown in sections
o this document relative to gateway treatments.
Te majority o the AA members preerred the
Cut Stone option.
Te only pier shape oered or this project north
o the approach to the Clark Bridge and the
south abutment o the Market Street Bridge were
round. Tere were two texture options or these
piers, one was the Aesthetic Design Guidelines
option with reveals only at eye level and a layered
limestone option that had reveals rom top to bot-
tom o the columns. All pier caps have rounded
noses. Te two options are as shown below and
on page 8 o the Section 3 Workbook or Section3 AA Meeting #1 included in the appendices.
Te majority o AA members preerred O
1, Aesthetic Design Guidelines with reveals
level.
Undersides o structures will be dictated by s
structure type. Tere are two structure type
in this section o the project, steel plate gird
the approach rom the Ohio River Bridge t
south o Market Street and hybrid concrete g
everywhere else. Tere were no box or tub g
specied or use in Section 3 in the RFP. Con
girders will be signicantly more uncluttered
will steel plate girders. Te DB will min
clutter by using the minimum number o b
between girders allowed by design specica
All structures passing under I-65 will be design
provide pedestrian and bicycle movements ex
today. Lighting will be provided to create
pleasant environment or both motorists and
orms o transportation.
Gateway treatments are applied to Court Av
and 10th Street. At Court Avenue, these inclu
gateway enhancements similar to those pro
(and required by the RFP) or Main and MStreets in Louisville. Monuments, sconce lig
and signage are all contributing gateway elemPier options rom Section 1 & S ection 3 Workbooks AA Meet-
ing #1. Option 1 (top) and Option 2 (bottom).
Form Liner options rom Section 1 & Section 3 Workbooks
AA Meeting #1.
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
11/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
At the rst AA meeting on March 21, 2013, th ree
options were provided as shown below and to the
right and on pages 2 and 3 o the Section 3 Work-
book rom meeting #1 included in the appendices.
Te AA members were nearly evenly split between
Options 2 and 3. However, nearly all o thos e rec-
ommending Option 2 wanted the option with real
masonry as opposed to the orm liner option pre-
sented. Te DB received letters rom City Pride
and the Mayors Ofce requesting real masonry be
used. Te DB agreed to investigate ways to accom-
plish this within the project budget and had several
meetings and discussions with representatives rom
the City and AA members about this topic. Letters
o response were provided to the City Pride and
the Mayor on April 17, 2013, that included the
increased costs o providing MSE panels with em-
bedded hal brick. Te costs could not be absorbed
by the DB. It was decided by the DB and BSM
to present two options at the second AA Meeting
on April 25, 2013. Te two options, are shown
below and on Page 2 o the Section 3 Workbook
rom AA Meeting #2 included in the appendices.
It was explained explicitly that the Brick/Limestone
option shown in the second meeting was or orm
liner and not real masonry. Again, the majority o
responses rom the AA showed a preerence or the
brick/limestone option but the responses included
comments asking or real masonry. Since this was
not an option, the DB and BSM recommended
the Cut Stone option be taken orward to nal design.
At 10th Street, the DB showed two op-
tions in meeting #1 as shown to the right
and on page 4 o the Section 3 Workboo
AA Meeting #1 included in the append
Te responses were nearly evenly split bet
Option 2, Cut Stone and an option not sh
Te option not shown was a brick/lime
combination similar to gateway brick orm
option at Court Avenue. Again, recomm
tions or the brick/limestone were accomp
by requests or real masonry. As explain
the Court Avenue gateway, the costs were
vided to the City and City Pride and were
to be cost prohibitive or the DB to pro
Te DB and BSM decided to take two op
to AA Meeting #2. Tose options wer
brick/limestone orm liner option and th
Gateways: Court Avenue West rom Section 3 Workbook AA
Meeting #1. Option 1 (top), Option 2 (middle) and Option 3(bottom).
Gateways: 10th Street rom Section 3 Workbook AA M#1. Option 1- Aesthetic Guidelines option with smooth co
and reveals at eye level (top) and Option 2 - Cut Stone ormtexture on all walls (bottom).
Gateways: Court Avenue rom Section 3 Workbook AA Meeting#2. Option 1 (top) and Option 2 (bottom).
Gateways: Court Avenue East rom Section 3 Workbook AAMeeting #1. Option 1 (top), Option 2 (middle) and Option 3
(bottom).
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
12/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
Stone option. Te options are as shown below
and on page 3 o the Section 3 Workbook or
AA Meeting #2 included in the appendices.
As with Court Avenue, a majority o the AA
members preerred the brick/limestone option
with real masonry. Te DB and BSM recom-
mended that the Cut Stone option be taken to nal
design, due to the prohibitive cost o real masonry.
Project
Section 1
Presentation
Requirements
I-65 rom south end othe New I-65 North-
bound Ohio RiverBridge and south end othe existing JFK russ tosouth side o River Road(includes all structures
within these limits)(Section 1)
wo ully integratedconcepts illustrating:
Color
Finished surace treat-ments (reveals, cham-
ers, texture, etc.)
Substructure detailing
Pier shapes
DB shall use box gird-ers or all structureswithin these limits
THE WALSH DBT PLAN:
Tis section crosses over the Waterront Park just west
o the Lincoln statue in a heavily utilized portion o
the park. Te Walsh DB met the requirements o
the RFP by:
Providing two options, one o which was a round
pier with reveals at eye level (Option 1). Option 2
was a round pier with evenly-spaced reveals rom
top to bottom to mimic layered limestone. Te
options were as shown to the right and on Page
9 (Approach Spans: Kentucky) o the Section 1
Workbook or AA Meeting #1 in the appendices.
he AA recommended a third option, as
shown below, which was round piers with no
reveals to match the existing piers to be salvaged.
Te round pier options were chosen primari
to the three piers to be salvaged rom the ex
JFK Bridge that will be in close proximity t
new piers. Te option selected by the AA ac
does a better job matching the existing pier
providing continuity.
As described in the RFP and the 2006 Aest
Design Guidelines, colors will be light gr
lightly colored. Concrete elements will be n
concrete color and painted elements will ma
closely as possible.
Box girders will be used in this section to pr
a clean and uncluttered underside o the bri
Approach Spans: Kentucky rom Section 1 Workbook AA Meet-ing #1. Option 1 (top) and Option 2 (bottom).
Approach Spans: Kentucky round option with no reveals recom-mended by the AA.
Gateways: Court Avenue rom S ection 3 Workbook AA Meeting#2. Option 1 (top) and Option 2 (bottom).
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
13/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
Project
Section 1
Presentation
Requirements
I-64 rom east side oWitherspoon Street
bridge west to end oProject (includes all
structures within theselimits)
wo ully-integratedconcepts illustrating:
Color
Finished surace treat-ment (reveals, chamers,
texture etc.)
Pier Shapes and spacing
Substructure detailing
Underside o all struc-tures shall be clean and
uncluttered
Appropriate, connectiveunderpass structures or
Louisville WaterrontPark access (pedestrian,
bike, vehicle, visual)
THE WALSH DBT PLAN:
Option 1 in this section adhered to the 2006 Aes-
thetic Guidelines or all piers and walls. Option 2
was a range o orm liner options as shown to the
right and on Pages 13 (Form Liners) and 14 (Form
Liners) o the Section 1 Workbook or AA Meeting
#1 in the appendices. Te AA was asked to provide
comment on which texture was preerred. Te
preerred orm liner will be used at all locations on
the project other than at gateways. Te Cut Stone
option was preerred by the AA.
Colors are as prescribed in the Aesthetic Guidelines
(light gray or lightly colored). Concrete elements
will be natural concrete color and painted elements
will match as closely as possible.
Designs or the underside o structures will vary
rom bridge to bridge, depending on whether
they are concrete I-girders or steel plate girders.In any case, the DB will use cross-rame designs
to minimize clutter and potential pigeon roosting.
he Plan includes an additional bicycle con-
nection rom just south o I-64 overpasses near
the railroad to a new plaza across rom the Big
Four ramp. A new segment o path will be con-
structed rom the end o the existing path north-
ward to connect to River Road as shown below.
Te DB will construct pedestrian plazas at the
intersection o River Road and Witherspoon at two
locations. One location is across rom the Big Four
Bridge and the other is across rom Slugger Field.
Te ollowing graphic illustrates how the nished
plaza will appear at both locations.
Project
Section 1
Presentation
Requirements
I-65 rom south side oRiver Road south to endo Project (includes allstructures within these
limits) (Section 1)
wo ully-integratconcepts illustrati(Structure over M
Street and Market shave box girders
Color
Finished surace trment (reveals, cham
texture etc.)
Pier shapes
Substructure detai
Underside o all strtures shall be clean
uncluttered
Appropriate, conntive underpass str
tures or Louisvillestreets (pedestrian, b
vehicle)
THE WALSH DBT PLAN:
Te DB showed three ully integrated concep
each gateway at Main and Market Streets.
concepts are illustrated in succeeding parag
in this document. At all other locations
options were shown or bridges and walls
rst option was the Aesthetic Design Guid
option with reveals at eye level and the secontion was a selection o orm liner texture op
Form Liner options rom Section 1 & Section 3 Workbooks
AA Meeting #1.
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
14/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
Piers also had two texture options. Colors are as
prescribed in the Aesthetic Guidelines (light gray
or lightly colored). C oncrete elements will be
natural concrete color. Painted elements will match
as closely as possible.
Finished surace treatments were a variety o reveals
and orm liner textures, as shown below, or walls
and piers.
As shown below, two pier options were shown to
the AA in the rst meeting.
Option 1 was the aesthetic design guidelines option
that had reveals at eye level. Te second option was
a series o evenly spaced reveals rom top to bottom
o the columns that simulated layered limestone.
Te AA recommended a third option, shown
below, or round columns with no reveals.
Te DB recommended the round pier column
option with no reveals to the BSM.
Te underside o structures will vary rom bridge
to bridge, depending on whether they are concrete
I-girders or steel plate girders. In any case, the DB
will use cross-rame designs to minimize clutter
and potential pigeon roosting. At Main and Market
Streets, the superstructure will be box girders as
prescribed in the RFP.
Te gateway structures at Main and Market Streets
included three options. Te Aesthetic Guidelines
option is Option 1, a special brick/limestone com-
bination is Option 2 and cut limestone is Option 3,
as shown on the right and the ollowing page and
on Page 2 (Gateways: Market Street) o the Section
1 Workbook or AA Meeting #2 in the appendices.
Form Liner options rom Section 1 & Section 3 WorkbooksAA Meeting #1.
Pier options rom Section 1 & Section 3 Workbooks AA Meet-
ing #1. Option 1 (top) and Option 2 (bottom).
Gateways: Market Street rom Section 1 Workbook AA M#1. Option 1 (top), Option 2 (middle),
and Option 3 (bottom).
AA recommended option,round columns with no reveals (above).
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
15/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
Gateways: Main Street Looking East rom Section 1 WorkbookAA Meeting #1. Option 1 (top), Option 2 (middle),
and Option 3 (bottom).
Gateways: Main Street Looking West rom Section 1 WorkbookAA Meeting #1. Option 1 (top), Option 2 (middle),
and Option 3 (bottom).
Gateways: Market Street and Jackson Street rom Section 1Workbook AA Meeting #1. Option 1 (top), Option 2 ( middle),
and Option 3 (bottom).
Te AA recommended a ourth option to be
sidered at the Main and Market Street gate
Te options presented to the DB by the AA
as shown below:
Gateways: Market Street (top), Main Street (middle), andket Street and Jackson Street (bottom).
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
16/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
Tese options below were presented at the AA
Meeting #2 or consideration.
wo monument options were presented at AA Meet-
ing #2. One had an urn adorning the top (Option 1) and
the other was without any adornments (Option 2) as
shown below. Option 2 was recommended by the DB.
Te AA recommended Option 2 at Market Street,
Option 1 at Main Street, and the Market Street and
Jackson Street option as shown below:
Due to construction constraints, the monuments on
the east side o Main Street cannot be constructed.
Tereore, monuments were added to the west side
o Jackson Street at the Market Street and Jackson
Street Gateway.
Te DB has been asked to look at a unique design
or the wall behind the Vermont American property.
Te DB asked representatives o the developers to
provide concepts or consideration. Te wall will
have a cut stone orm liner texture.
Project
Section 1
Presentation
Requirements
Retaining Walls alongI-65 (or embankment
areas) rom Wither-spoon Drive south toend o Project on the
eastside and westside oInterstate
Options or orm linertexture, illustrated with
photos and physicalsamples. Wall shallbe a minimum o 6
eet high and shall beully integrated into theLandscaping Plan. Wallsshall serve as control oaccess. Consider optionor a transition to ullheight retaining wallsin the areas o street
crossings.
THE WALSH DBT PLAN:
Walls in this section o the project are generally ull
height. In those areas where ull height walls are not
necessary to minimize right o way acquisition, they
transition to a minimum o 6 eet. Te transitions rom
ull height to shorter walls will be a smooth trans
not stepped or terraced. Te base option was the
thetic Guidelines wall with secondary options be
range o orm liner textures as shown on Page 9 o
document. Te AA preerred the Cut Stone orm
texture. Landscaping plans will address areas w
slopes are exposed due to shorter walls.
Project
Section 1
Presentation
Requirements
Retaining Wall alongsouth side o I-64, I-71and associated ramps
(or embankment areas)beginning with thenorth end o the I-
71/I-64 EB ramp bridgeover East WitherspoonStreet, extending east
to the bridges overEast Witherspoon/CSX
Railroad.
Options or orm lintexture, illustrated wi
photos and physicasamples. Wall shallbe a minimum o 6
eet high and shall bully integrated into tLandscaping Plan. Wshall serve as control
access.
THE WALSH DBT PLAN:
Te two options were a retaining wall (6 eet high
tion 1 or a ree-standing metal wall at the toe o the
Option 2, as shown on the next page and on Pa
(Aesthetic Access Control) o the Section 1 Work
or AA Meeting #1 in the appendices. Te AA
DB recommended approval o Option 1 to the B
Gateways: Main Street rom Section 1 Workbook AA Meeting#2. Option 1 (top) and Option 2 (bottom).
Gateways: Monuments rom Section 1 Workbook AA Meeting#2. Option 1 (le) and Option 2 (right).
Final Gateway selections: Market Street (top), Main Street(middle) rom Section 1 Workbook AA Meeting #2, and the
Market Street and Jackson Street Option (bottom).
Gateways: Market Street rom Section 1 Workbook AA Meeting#2. Option 1 (top), Option 2 (middle), and Option 3 (bottom).
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
17/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
Project
Section 1
Presentation
Requirements
Retaining Wall alongnorth side o I-64 WB(embankment areas),
beginning at the bridgesover East Witherspoon/CSX Railroad and ex-
tending west to the I-64WB Bridge over RiverRoad(area o I-64 WBparalleling River Roadadjacent to Waterront
Park)
Options or orm linertexture, illustrated with
photos and physicalsamples. Wall shallbe a minimum o 6
eet high and shall beully integrated into theLandscaping Plan. Wallsshall serve as control o
access.
THE WALSH DBT PLAN:
Te options and conclusions or this section are the
same as the preceding project section discussion in this
document.
Project
Section 3
Presentation
Requirements
Retaining Walls alongI-65 (or embankmentareas) rom Ohio River
Bridges north abut-ments (New ORB andExisting Kennedy) andUS 31 north abutments
north to end o Project inIndiana.
Options or orm linertexture, illustrated with
photos and physicalsamples. Wall shallbe a minimum o 6
eet high and shall beully integrated into
the Landscaping Plan.Walls shall serve ascontrol o access.
THE WALSH DBT PLAN:
Te two options shown to the Area Adviso ry team were
Option 1, Aesthetic Design Guidelines walls and Op-
tion 2, a range o orm liner textures as shown in this
document on Page 9 and on Pages 9 (Form Liners) and
10 (Form Liners) o the Section 3 Workbook or AA
Meeting #1 in the appendices. Te AA and DB recom-
mended to the BSM that t he Cut Stone option be used.
Project
Section 3
Presentation
Requirements
Retaining Walls alongI-65 over Stansier Ave.
Match existing wall inappearance
THE WALSH DBT PLAN:
Te new walls will be designed to match the appearance
o the existing wall.
Project-Wide Presentation
Requirements
Landscaping Plan Te DB shall providean integrated Land-
scaping Plan. See re-quirements in Section9.2.3. Te plan shall
cover the Project area,except along Main and
Market Streets.
THE WALSH DBT PLAN:
As part o the echnical Proposal , the DB developed
a Landscaping Plan concept, which was based on the
2006 Landscaping Guidelines developed or Section 1
and modied to meet the overall goals o the project. See
the Walsh DB Plan or Section 9.2.3 in this Aesthetics
and Enhancement Implementation Plan. Landscaping
is accomplished at key locations where aesthetic treat-
ments can:
Enhance local communities.
Create a quality visual experience or visitors to
the community at ingress and egress points to the
interstate network.
Te landscaping plan philosophy is based on experi-
ence on the Watterson Expressway reconstruction
project which was done in the 1990s. Experience
showed that certain types o plants were more likely to
survive long term in the harsh roadway environ
Plants such as shrubs and ornamental trees stru
to survive while larger deciduous and evergreen
survived and are thriving today. Te philosop
the Downtown Crossing landscaping is to mim
surviving elements o the Watterson project and
canopy within areas o right o way large enou
accommodate this type o tree. Both Indian
Kentucky AAs approved this plan and will be re
mended to the BSM or nal approval.
FROM THE RFP: 9.1.3.1
AESTHETICS AND
ENHANCEMENTS
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Te plan shall establish the DBs methodology or
mining public preerence on these options or pres
tion to the AAs and the BSM in consultation wi
BSHC. Te plan shall:
A. Establish the methods or coordinating and int
ing with the AAs and the BSM in consultation
the BSHC. At a minimum, the DBs shall condu
meetings with each AA. Te plan shall also defn
methodology by which the DB shall obtain rom the
Aesthetic Access Control rom Section 1 Workbook AA Meeting#1. Option 1 (top) and Option 2 (bottom).
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
18/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
and the BSM in consultation with the BSHC a nal
recommendation on each o the detailed aesthetic options.
THE WALSH DBT PLAN:
Te Walsh DB, through regular Walsh-KYC Aes-
thetic Focus Group meetings, established a schedule
or meetings with the AAs (Indianas and Kentuckys),
BSM, BSHC, and HPAs (Indianas and Kentuckys),
as itemized and outlined in this document. Once a
dra AEI Plan was approved, the DB presented to the
BSM all graphics intended or the initial set o AA
meetings. Aer approval by the BSM, the next step was
to meet with the AA members, who were provided a
workbook or input into the development o the Record
o Recommendations and Decisions. Te DB coordi-
nated meeting times and dates with the BSM and then
sent the requisite notice o meetings to the AAs. Te
initial meeting was held in Indiana at the Holiday Inn
Riverview and the second meeting at Guthrie-Mayes
ofce on 3rd Street in Louisville.
A meeting with the BSHC was held on March 19, 2013,
to review presentation materials or the initial AA
meetings. No review comments were received and no
ollow-up actions were required. Meetings with the two
preservation advisory teams were held on March 27 and
28, 2013. Again, no comments were received.
Following the rst set o AA meetings on March 21,
2013, the BSHC meeting, and the HPA meetings, a
ollow-up meeting with the BSM was held to develop
actions to prepare or the second set o AA meetings,
scheduled or April 25, 2013. Following the April 25
2013, AA meeting, a meeting was held with the BSM
to discuss ollow-up actions. A ll issues were successully
resolved aer two AA meetings and numerous ormal
and inormal meetings with stakeholder s. KYC pro-
vided input or the nal AEI document at the ollow-up
meeting.
Te draf and nal Record o Recommendations and
Decisions were developed through the use o workbooks
provided to AA members at each meeting. Te 11 x
17 workbooks had aesthetic and enhancements graphics
on the le side o the page and space on the right side
or recording comments, aesthetic preerences, the com-
menters signature, and the date. Te page was perorated
so that the right hal could be removed and returned to
the DB. A second meeting with the BSHC was held
on May 21, 2013. Comments were incorporated into the
nal document. Aer the rst set o AA meetings, a
dra Recommendations and Decisions document, based
on AA workbook input, was presented to the BSM.
A similar approach was ollowed or the second meet-
ing. Te DB met with the BSM on May 16, 2013, to
discuss nal recommendations. Per the RFP, Section 9.1,
Paragraph 4, the BSM shall consult with the BSCH,
as appropriate, to review the recommendations. Te
DB met with both the BSM and BSCH to present
the dra recommendations. Te Walsh DB developed
the nal Recommendations and Decisions document
and presented it to the BSM, or nal approval.
Te nal Record o Recommendations and Decisions
(RR&D) and the Appendix CD include:
Introduction
AA Meeting #1 materials: presentation, workbooks,
worksheets, meeting summaries, RR&D AA #1 with
spreadsheets or Sections 1, 2 and 3
AA Meeting #2 materials: presentation, workbooks,
worksheets, meeting summaries, RR&D AA #2 with
spreadsheets or Section 1 and 3 , each spreadsheet
includes 1 Section 2 issue, anchor piers
Final Record o Recommendations and Decisions
or Sections 1, 2 and 3
Additional supporting inormation
B. Defne the role o the Aesthetics and Enhancements
Manager in identiying areas or elements o the proposed
bridge, roadway, and surroundings that present opp
nities in the development o a visually acceptable d
THE WALSH DBT PLAN:
Te AEM, through the technical proposal proces
veloped an overall approach to aesthetics enhancem
in conjunction with the diverse interdisciplinary
Te DB chose to invest heavily in aesthetics, u
standing the history o the project on both sides o
river. Sections 1 and 2 already had a long histo
public input on aesthetics but Section 3 had no p
input or aesthetics. Te AEM and team member
with representatives o Jeersonville to get eedba
concepts prior to nalizing the technical proposal
gestions were incorporated rom those meetings.
Locations o emphasis were selected in a variety o
to include:
Environmental documents
Historic preservation plans
History o public meetings
Meetings with locals in preparation o the tech
proposal
RFP requirements
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
19/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
Goals were developed and include:
Maximize benets to local communities
Enhance impression o visitors to the community
by enhancements to ingress and egress points rom
the interstate network
C. Dene the responsibilities and authority the Aesthetics
and Enhancements Manager shall have in overseeing and
reviewing the overall bridge design, design details, ull-scale
mock-ups, samples, and other submittals relating to the
development o a visually acceptable design.
THE WALSH DBT PLAN:
Our AEM will lead the Walsh DB program or coor-
dination with the AAs, BSHC, HPAs, and BSM to
develop the AEI Plan, culminating in clear decisions on
concepts that best meet the various needs and desires o
the aected communities. Te AEM will draw on and
manage resources rom throughout the Walsh DB or
architecture, engineering, and graphics expertise. He
will communicate the nal aesthetics and enhancements
requirements to the design team to ensure their proper
implementation. He will accomplish this ormally, by
distribution o design direction memoranda, and inor-
mally, through his on-going attendance and participation
in individual discipline ocus group meetings. He will
ensure that AEI Plan requirements are implemented
thoroughly and correctly in the design documents.
Our AEM will have stop-work authority in the design and
construction process. Te Walsh DBs design quality
process includes a mandatory interdisciplinary review
on each and every design package in each phase o de-
velopment (conceptual, interim, and RFC). Te review
by the AEM conrms compliance with the applicable
requirements o the AEI Plan and the project scope.
Physical evidence o this review and resolution o any
comments must be included in the quality documenta-
tion that is examined by the Design Quality Manager
(DQM) during audit o the package beore it is submit-
ted to KYC or review. Te DQM will not certiy the
package as complete and will not allow the package to
advance to submittal i the AEMs review has not been
completed and documented. Tis no exceptions aspect
o our quality process ensures the AEMs engagement
in all applicable details o the design and provides the
means or his oversight rom the unique perspective o
aesthetic compliance.
D. Dene the authority o the Aesthetics and Enhance-
ments Manager and the process or which the Aesthetics
and Enhancements Manager shall coordinate the recom-
mendations rom the AAs and the BSM in consultation
with the BSHC with the DBs design and construction
teams.
THE WALSH DBT PLAN:
See comments to 9.1.1 included herein
E. Establish a schedule or the aorementioned two meet-
ings, and or submittal o the Record o Recommendations
and Decisions document.
THE WALSH DBT PLAN:
Te DB worked with the AAs, in consultation with
the BSHC, to develop the AEI plan. Meeting dates are
as ollows:
Meeting with BSM March 8, 2013
BSHC meeting March 19 , 2013
Initial AA meetings March 21, 2013
(all meetings in one day)
HPA meetings March 27-28, 2013
Meeting with BSM April 5, 2013
Final AA meetings April 25, 2013
(all meetings in one day)
Meeting with BSM
to nalize the AEI and RR&D
May 16, 2013
Meeting with BSHC
to nalize the AEI and RR&D
May 21, 2013
Final AEI and RR&D submittal
June 2013
Following the AA meetings and ollow-up mee
with the BSM, the Walsh DB submitted a Reco
Recommendations and Decisions based on comm
rom the AA members and BSM. Included
DB recommendations or adoption o concept
had clear consensus. Items not having clear cons
were taken to the second AA meeting. Te DB
with the BSHC as directed by the BSM.
Te Walsh DB, in addition to the meetings desc
above, met in 2013, with the Downtown Develop
Corporation on January 28, February 5, March 18,
4, April 19, April 23, May 6 and May 13. Mee
with Jeersonville or City Pride occurred on Marc
March 19, April 4 and April 17. Numerous other
and inormal conversations and meetings were h
develop consensus.
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
20/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
F. Defne the process o producing and submitting the
Record o Recommendations and Decisions document,
including review and approval o the document by the
BSM in consultation with the BSHC, as appropriate.
THE WALSH DBT PLAN:
Te nal Record o Recommendations and Decisions
document is being submitted as part o the nal AEI plan.
Te RR&D includes a compilation o signed workbook
sheets rom AA members, a summary spreadsheet o
those comments along with DB recommendations,
workbooks rom the meetings, presentation materials,
and meeting summaries. Te meetings with the BSHC
and HPAs provided an opportunity or the environmen-
tal groups to comment on DB plans or Aesthetics and
Enhancements. No actionable comments were received.
FROM THE RFP: 9.2.2 GENERAL
AESTHETIC AND ENHANCEMENT
REQUIREMENTS
Te DB shall design and construct all aesthetics and
enhancements elements so that the experience o travel-
ers, both on the interstate and city streets, and neighbors
is visually harmonious and orderly. Key points o the
(2006 aesthetic design) guidelines are summarized below:
A. Substantial landscaping and grading to enhance driving
and pedestrian experience and reduce scale/visual impacts
rom long and close range view points.
B. An attractive, uncluttered, under viaduct environment
or pedestrians and bicyclists. Adoption o bufer and tran-
sitional zones between historic districts and interchange
to reduce noise and visual impact
C. Clean, elegant, well-proportioned superstructures,
viaduct piers, and wall structures.
D. Use o uniorm lightly painted elements like superstruc-
tures, railings, light poles, and sign supports, to visually
uniy the interchange.
E. A consistent amily o shapes to be used throughout
the Project.
F. Well-defned, attractive gateway bridges into the
community.
G. Surace streets to be designed as complete streets to
accommodate motorized vehicles, pedestrians, and bicycles
or everyday use.
THE WALSH DBT PLAN:
Members o the Walsh DB developed both the original
FEIS alternative and the conceptual plans shown in the
RFP or this project in concert with the basic aesthetic
design guidelines shown above. In act, members o the
team worked with the original author o these guidelines
in their development. Te FEIS alternative was ully
vetted with the BSHC, KHPA, BSM, and a variety o
public and agency stakeholders during its development.
It is recognized that the conceptual plans were developed
with a slightly dierent direction and purpose than the
FEIS alternative but eorts were made to be as consistent
as possible with the Aesthetic Guidelines mentioned
above. Te base option that the Walsh DB proposed
is identical to the original Guidelines option or piers,
walls, and abutments. Te exception is that round shapes
are being used instead o elliptical or ease o construc-
tion and has been presented consistently throughout
the echnical Proposal and all related discussions. Te
second pier option that was required by the RFP is a
variation o the original Guidelines option. Secondar y
wall options were chosen to be o varying textures that
represent materials used within the historic districts. It
was the intent o th e DB to present options to t he AAs
in such a manner as to ensure a consistency o textures
throughout the project that create a harmonious end
product.
FROM THE RFP: HISTORIC
MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS
Te DBs AEI Plan describes the DBs approach
veloping the designs or the areas o the Project adjo
historic properties/districts identied in the First Am
MOA dated April 4, 2012. Te AEI Plan also identi
sta that shall be responsible or the planning and e
tion o the display, including at a minimum the ollo
A. An experienced historian with demonstrated pr
experience in the documentation o historic structu
B. An experienced landscape architect with demons
previous experience in the incorporation o histor
ments in the design and construction o highways.
Te key staf identied above shall be used or any P
work that involves incorporation o historic interpret
THE WALSH DBT PLAN:
Te Walsh DBs approach to developing design
areas o the project adjoining historic propertie
as ollows:
Have an option that was already approved b
BSHC and HPAs in Section 1 (i.e., options
on the 2006 Aesthetic Guidelines).
Additional options or vertical walls that m
eatures ound within historic districts su
limestone/brick orm liner combinations an
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
21/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
option that mimics natural geographic eatures such
as layered limestone were oered or consideration,
based on the guiding principles rom RFP Section
9.2.2 listed herein.
Our team includes experienced cultural historians at
Cultural Resource Analysts, Inc. (CRAI) and an experi-
enced landscape architect in Je Grob o Stantec. CR AI
has worked or the KYC or many years and Mr. Grob
has completed many projects o historic signicance
or Stantec.
FROM THE RFP: 9.2.3
LANDSCAPE PLAN
During earlier stages o the LSIORBP, landscaping
guidelines were developed or the Kentucky side o the
Ohio River. Te guidelines were presented in the Land-
scape Design Guidelines and Concepts or the Kennedy
Interchange dated August 2006. See Section 1.9 o this
Project Scope document or obtaining the Reerence
Document. As stated in Section 9.2.2, the DB shall be
responsible or developing similar principles and guide-
lines or the Indiana side o the river along the Green-
way Corridor only with input rom the Indiana AA
and the BSM in consultation with the BSHC.
Te key point o those guidelines and suggestions or
landscaping treatments in the interchange area are sum-
marized below:
A. Reinorce a sense o regional identity and place.
B. Create a quality visual experience or travelers.
C. Improve highway drivability and saety.
D. Provide visual continuity and internally uniy vari-
ous highway components.
E. Integrate the interchange with the local setting.
F. Screen and buer views o the highway rom adjacent
areas, and screen views rom the highway o unattract-
ive urban development.
G. Accentuate scenic vistas.
H. Protect and improve environmental quality including
air and water quality, habitat protection, and erosion
control.
I. Visually and physically extend and connect parks and
green space.
J. Create and reinorce multi-modal connections and
linkages.
K. Reduce roadside maintenance.
L. Contribute to denition o community gateways.
Te preliminary landscaping concept divides the Kenne-
dy Interchange into landscape zones by existing context.
Tese landscape zones and their characteristics are as
ollows:
A. I-64 Segment: Ravine Woodland
a. Recessed highway anked by densely planted
(wooded) side slopes.
b. Plants screen urban areas rom the highway while
buering views o the highway rom adjacent neigh-
borhoods.
B. I-64/I-71 Segment: Braid Bars and Islands
a. Plants and landorms symbolize vegetated gravel
bars and braid bars along rivers and creeks.
b. Plants visually buer multiple lanes o trafc, re-
ducing distraction and improving drivability .
C. I-64/I-65 Conuence: River Bottom ree Groves
a. Canopy o large bottomland trees (sycamores, cot-
tonwoods) across gently rolling grassland .
b. ree canopy buers visual severity o overhead
highway structures.
D. I-65 Segment: Rock Clis and Ledges
a. rees and shrubs along base o highway walls and
abutments.
b. all trees near walls visually buer and mitigate
scale and severity o walls.
Te DB shall use the Schematic Landscape Plan or
I-65 included in the August 2006 Landscaping guide-
lines reerenced above as an example o the type, sc
and density o landscaping required or the Project.
addition, the DB reviewed the Louisville Metro L
Development Code, Chapter 10 Part 3 or urther g
ance on expected landscaping requirements.
Te DB shall use the above guidelines as a starting
point in the development o their AEI Plan and or
meetings with the AAs, BSHC and BSM.
THE WALSH DBT PLAN:
Te Walsh DB utilized the Landscaping Guid
previously prepared by Section 1 landscape arch
in earlier phases o the project as a starting poi
their plan. Material types and philosophies rom
previous plan were incorporated into the plan with
additional concepts such as:
Where do we spend nite resources and g
best bang or the buck? Te Walsh DB de
to place materials in this priority order:
Maximum community benet rom view
enhancement and community integrati
Induce travelers into the community to
a positive rst impression.
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
22/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
Realizing that maintenance is an issue, how does
that aect the type and location o plants?
Use plant materials and walls along the south
side o River Road to complement the Water-
ront Park.
Provide bike/ped users o Witherspoon Street
and River Road intersections with comortable
places to stop while traversing the area.
Use aesthetic access control retaining walls to
enhance, rather than detract rom the landscape.
Te Walsh DB utilized past experience on local land-
scaping projects to rene the landscaping guidelines . Te
Watterson Expressway landscaping o the early 1990s
was used as a model and successul plant types were
recommended or the Downtown Crossing.
Below and to the right are the recommended concept
graphics or each project section.
Liberty Street Loop.
I-64/I-65/I-71 Stack.
I-64/I-71.
Story Avenue.
River Road.
Court Avenue.
10th Street
Exit 0 NB Ramp.
Stansier Avenue.
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
23/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
Submitted By: Walsh Construction 100 Witherspoon Street Louisville, KY 40202
LOUISVILLE-SOUTHERN INDIANA OHIO RIVER BRIDGES PROJECT DOWNTOWN CROSSING
Final Record of Recommendations and Decisions
June
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
24/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
This page let blank intentionally
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
25/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
Final Record of Recommendations and Decisions Section 1
Section 1 - Surace Texture Plan and Aesthetic & Enhancement Treatment Location Plan Map
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
26/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
Final Record of Recommendations and Decisions Section 1
Final Graphic Recommendations and additional comments
Gateways: Market Street
Gateways: Monuments
Gateways: Market Street and Jackson Street
This concept was developed rom a sketch provided to the DBT by the AAT prior to the rst meeting.
This, and two additional concepts, was provided at the second meeting. The AAT recommended this
option and the DBT recommended approval to the BSMT.
A majority o the AAT members wanted the option to add nials, urns, or some other ar twork to the
monuments at some point in the uture, ater a local group decides what they should look like. The
tops o the monuments will be sloped to provide drainage.
The DBT will not provide or install the elements as part o this project.
The monuments at Jackson Street will match the ones at Market Street. Monuments will be placed
on the west side only on Jackson Street. However, unlike the bridge over Market Street, the barrier
acades on the bridge over Jackson Street will not be enhanced.
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
27/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
Final Graphic Recommendations and additional comments
Gateways: Main Street
Gateways: Signage
Approach Spans: Kentucky
Final Record of Recommendations and Decisions Section 1
This concept was developed rom a sketch provided to the DBT by the AAT prior to the rst meeting.
This, and one additional concept, was provided at the second meeting. The AAT recommended this
option and the DBT recommended approval to the BSMT. Monuments will be placed on the west
side only on Main Street.
During a discussion with the DBT, a large group representing several downtown stakeholder groups
stated that they would undertake this eort. Final decisions will be provided to the DBT by the end
o 2014 and, in concurrence with the KYTC and consultation with the BSHC T, a nal decision will be
made. The DBT has agreed to install the signage as part o the project.
A majority o the AAT members wanted smooth columns with no reveals to match the existing
columns that will be salvaged rom the existing bridge and elt that the reveals presented could be a
uture maintenance issue.
INFORMATION TO COME
FROM A LOCAL COMMITTEE TO DEVELOP
SIGNAGE RECOMMENDATIONS
FOR MAIN AND MARKET STREETS
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
28/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
Final Graphic Recommendations and additional comments
Piers
Aesthetic Access Control
Plazas
Final Record of Recommendations and Decisions Section 1
See comments rom the discussion on the Kentucky approach spans on the previous page. The AAT
used similar rationale or recommending smooth columns.
Both the AAT and the KYTC supported the retaining wall concept, but or dierent reasons. The
AAT members preerred the retaining walls to provide additional space between the sidewalk and
the wall; however, or engineering reasons the wall will not be located urther rom the sidewalk to
create more space. KYTC was concerned about long-term maintenance behind the wall and a ence.
The walls will have a cut stone appearance.
The AAT members supported the construction o plazas at two locations: across Witherspoon Street
rom Slugger Field and near the Witherspoon Street and River Road Intersection near the Big Four
Bridge. Final design will work out details o materials, bike racks, etc.
l d f d d
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
29/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
Final Graphic Recommendations and additional comments
Form Liners
Landscaping Liberty Street
Landscaping I-64/I-65/I-71 Stack
Final Record of Recommendations and Decisions Section 1
The AAT preerred the Cut Stone option. The DBT recommends approval.
The AAT wanted to simpliy the original concept that was presented, which included artwork, to
include only trees and grass. The design will include canopy trees and ornamentals but no hardscape
treatments.
The AAT supported the concept o using canopy trees due to long term maintenance concerns o
using shrubs or ornamentals. A nal detailed landscape plan will be presented to the BSMT prior to
completion o design.
Fi l R d f R d ti d D i i S ti 1
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
30/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
Final Graphic Recommendations and additional comments
Landscaping I-64/I-71 Braids and Bars
Landscaping Story Avenue
Landscaping River Road
Final Record of Recommendations and Decisions Section 1
The AAT supported the concept o using canopy trees due to long term maintenance concerns o
using shrubs or ornamentals. A nal detailed landscape plan will be presented to the BSMT prior to
completion o design.
The AAT supported the concept o using canopy trees due to long term maintenance concerns o
using shrubs or ornamentals. A nal detailed landscape plan will be presented to the BSMT prior to
completion o design.
The concept o using similar types and locations o tree species located within Waterront Park near
this River Road location was supported by the AAT.
Fi l R d f R d ti d D i i S ti 1
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
31/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
Final Graphic Recommendations and additional comments
Bicycle & Pedestrian Enhancement
Final Record of Recommendations and Decisions Section 1
This concept was supported by the AAT and will connect an existing multi-use path south o the I-64
corridor to the new plaza on River Road.
Final Record of Recommendations and Decisions Section 2
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
32/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
Final Graphic Recommendations and additional comments
Anchor Piers
Tower Options
Approach Spans: Indiana
Final Record of Recommendations and Decisions Section 2
Both AATs supported the concept shown. It has an arched underside to the pier cap and round pier
columns.
Both AATs supported the pointed tower top option.
Both AATs supported the option o round columns with reveals at eye level, similar to the concepts
developed or the Aesthetic Design Guidelines or Section 1 in 2006.
Final Record of Recommendations and Decisions Section 2
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
33/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
Final Graphic Recommendations and additional comments
Aesthetic Lighting
Final Record of Recommendations and Decisions Section 2
Both AATs supported this concept but asked or consideration o placement o lights or
maintenance purposes. The lighting will need to adjust to accommodate airings needed to mitigate
wind impact. Also, the lighting will need to be approved by the U. S. Coast Guard.
Final Record of Recommendations and Decisions Section 3
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
34/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
Final Record of Recommendations and Decisions Section 3
Section 3 - Surace Texture Plan Map
N.T.S.
Retaining walls 9, 10, 18, 19, 21,
34A, 34B to match existing panel
style (Smooth Puzzle Piece)
Retaining walls 38 & 39 (outside o Clark Memorial
Bridge) to be partial reused limestone acade, partial
limestone block orm liner (similar to existing limestone
appearance) : locations to be determined by Bi-StateManagement Team
All other retaining walls to be
Cut Stone
Final Record of Recommendations and Decisions Section 3
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
35/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
Final Graphic Recommendations and additional comments
Gateways: Court Avenue East
Gateways: 10th Street
Gateway Signage - Court Avenue
Final Record of Recommendations and Decisions Section 3
The DBT recommends this option pending a decision by others about additional unding or urther
enhancements. A decision on lights atop the monuments is also pending. An amendment can be
made to address any uture changes that may occur.
The DBT recommends this option pending actions by others to nd additional unding or urther
enhancements. I changes occur at a uture date, an amendment can be made to this document.
The signage option refects the work o a local committee and AAT comments.
Final Record of Recommendations and Decisions Section 3
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
36/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
Final Graphic Recommendations and additional comments
City Signage
Piers
Form Liners
Final Record of Recommendations and Decisions Section 3
The concept shown represents the work o a local committee and AAT comments. The base material
will refect a nal decision on gateway treatments at Court Avenue.
The AAT preers this option round with reveals at eye level. The DBT recommends approval.
The DBT recommends Cut Stone, to be used at locations illustrated on the Section 3 - Surace
Texture Plan Map.
Final Record of Recommendations and Decisions Section 3
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
37/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
Final Graphic Recommendations and additional comments
Landscaping: Court Avenue
Landscaping: 10th Street
Landscaping: Stansier
Final Record of Recommendations and Decisions Section 3
The DBT recommends the concept shown, which was supported by the AAT. The philosophy is to
use canopy trees in lieu o shrubs and ragile o rnamentals due to long term maintenance concerns.
The DBT will work with local groups during nal design to address concerns and provide space or
local planting eorts. A nal detailed landscaping plan will be presented to the BSMT prior to the
completion o design.
The DBT recommends the concept shown which was supported by the AAT. The philosophy is to use
canopy trees in lieu o shrubs and ragile ornamentals due to long term maintenance concerns. The
DBT will work with local groups during nal design to address concerns and provide space or local
planting eorts.
The DBT recommends the concept shown, which was supported by the AAT. The philosophy is to
use canopy trees in lieu o shrubs and ragile o rnamentals due to long term maintenance concerns.
The DBT will work with local groups during nal design to address concerns and provide space or
local planting eorts. It is possible a noise barrier adjacent to the I-65 SB lanes could be constructed
in the uture. That decision will be made ater construction.
Final Record of Recommendations and Decisions Section 3
-
7/27/2019 Downtown bridge aesthetics plan
38/38
A E I & R e c o r d o f R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d D e c i s i o n s
Final Graphic Recommendations and additional comments
Landscaping: Exit 0 NB RampThe DBT recommends the concept shown, which was supported by the AAT. The philosophy is to
use canopy trees in lieu o shrubs and ragile o rnamentals due to long term maintenance concerns.
The DBT will work with local groups during nal design to address concerns and provide space or
local planting eorts.