‘It looks like a vintage school cross-walk with an arch tacked on to it.?
That’s how Oxford Village President Steve Allen described what the proposed 100-foot long, prefabricated Polly Ann Trail pedestrian bridge looks like to him.
‘The original request was more proportional and ornate so as to make it be a landmark for the community,? Allen said referring to the specifications requested by the special bridge committee ? which he served on ? consisting of village council members, planning commissioners and members of the Oxford Community Development Authority.
Allen said Larry Obrecht, the former Oakland County Commissioner and Polly Ann Trail Manager who initiated and oversees the $1.3 million bridge project, ‘did listen to the village committee, but did not execute exactly as specified.?
In last week’s Leader, Obrecht stated that the details of the bridge’s appearance were ‘as demanded by? the village committee and it was designed to local officials? specifications.
Obrecht said he went to village officials years ago and said, ‘Tell me what the bridge should look like.?
?(The bridge plan) looks nothing like the renderings provided by the village committee,? Allen said. ‘The bridge design misses the mark completely from a proportion and aesthetic standpoint.?
OCDA board member Dave Weckle agreed.
‘I was on the bridge committee and it’s not anything near what we expected or anticipated,? Weckle said of the site plan. ‘When the drawings came back to the OCDA (a few months ago), we made a motion to not approve them as submitted and redo them based on our comments. . .I hated it. I was the one who made the motion to redo it.?
But Weckle said the plans were never redone and the same ones the OCDA rejected were submitted for site plan review.
‘The bridge was intended to resemble a vintage railroad bridge,? Allen said. ‘It looks kind of like a railroad bridge insomuch as a camel looks kind of like a horse.?
Allen explained that ‘the emphasis is on the wrong design element? in the proposed bridge plan.
‘The dominant design feature was the arch theme (in the village’s request). Now the dominant feature is the chain link (fence) square tube running through it,? Allen said. ‘Chain link is not ornate. In fact, it was requested by the village committee to NOT use chain link at all.?
The submitted site plan shows a 6-foot high , PVC-coated, black chain link fence on both sides of the bridge.
The approved bridge guidelines set forth by the village committee specifically called for a ‘fine mesh cage (not chain link fence)? to ‘protect pedestrians and vehicles below.?
Allen and Weckle noted there are no pedestrian lights on the bridge (to enhance its night-time appearance and safety for its users) and no landscaping on the sides of the bridge, both specific requests of the bridge committee.
The bridge site plan submitted is ‘really quite incomplete and should not be acted upon until corrected,? Allen said. ‘I have to concur with our planner on this.?
In a Dec. 9 review, the village planner, the Northville-based McKenna Associates, Inc., stated the plan was ‘incomplete, little more than a conceptual description of the proposed bridge location.?
The planner noted 19 ‘general requirements of the Zoning Ordinance,? which are necessary for site plan review, were not supplied with the submitted plans. As a result, the planner recommended the planning commission ‘withhold action on this plan until the additional detail information required by Ordinance is provided for review.?
‘My 14 years experience on the village planning commission tells me that to approve the plans, as is, would be grossly unfair to everyone that has followed the rules, procedures and standards up to this point. There are far too many unanswered questions and room for interpretation. Knowing that these documents are the ‘building contract? with the village, how could anyone, in good conscience, sign off??
The bridge site plan must still come before the village planning commission for its approval.
However, Allen does not believe the planning commission’s possible approval or denial will mean anything substantive to the bridge project.
‘I think that they are asking for approvals as a courtesy, but do not really need it to proceed,? he said. ‘I do not believe that (the planning commission) can (stop the bridge project) without protracted litigation.
‘The history of these types of projects would prove it,? Allen added.
When asked if he believes a pedestrian bridge is absolutely necessary for the Polly Ann Trail, Allen replied, ‘I do not believe that it is necessary. I do, however, believe that it is desired by the project leaders.?
‘There are several alternatives to this, but none seem to be the desired path. Rerouting the trail through downtown (Oxford), instead of around the downtown, might be nice,? he explained.
‘One idea was a tunnel, but (it) was rejected for safety reasons. Another was a (traffic) light with pushbutton activation, but was not even considered by (Obrecht),? Allen said.
‘I really do not think that ‘what the village wants? has ever been an important factor in this. It’s just my feeling.?
Weckle said both he and the OCDA support the idea of a pedestrian bridge.
‘The OCDA does want the bridge,? he said. ‘We’re in favor of the bridge versus a pedestrian crosswalk across M-24. That is so dangerous. We think (a bridge) is the safest way. Given the two options, I’d prefer the bridge personally.?
‘If it’s done properly, it will be a great architectural feature for the Village of Oxford and community of Oxford,? Weckle added.
Weckle noted the bridge will be ‘good for pedestrian circulation? through the downtown and help connect things like Powell Lake Township Park, Paint Creek Trail and other trails.
Allen noted that he ‘would tend to agree with my colleagues,? such as the fire chief and village police chief, who have recently criticized the bridge project in light of the state’s budget woes.
‘The entire bridge project seems to come at a time that the state budget is in disarray,? the village president said. ‘Given the choice between the bridge or a return of full revenue sharing, I would choose the latter. Can you say Zilwaukee??