City gets leeway on viaduct fencing

COLUMBUS -- A fencing requirement clarification for the viaduct proposal has one city councilman even more supportive of the project.

The fencing requirement is significantly less invasive than many initially thought, according to an e-mail from City Administrator Joseph Mangiamelli, although there are still questions to be answered regarding the barrier.

HDR Engineering Inc. has clarified with the Nebraska Department of Roads that fencing “will only be required in the area of the pedestrian overpass at 18th Avenue,” Mangiamelli wrote in the e-mail. “While the rule of thumb is generally 500 feet, it will be designed to include the least amount of fencing necessary to meet the goal of getting pedestrians and others to use the overpass and not try to cross tracks otherwise.”

When asked for a clarification on whether the 500 feet of fencing was the total span of the fencing or fencing would be required 500 feet in each direction of the pedestrian overpass, he said that is a question that is still pending and would have to be answered no later than the design process.

Although the total length of the fencing from the 18th Avenue pedestrian overpass is not known, “this is clearly great news in that fencing was first thought to be a requirement at the viaducts as well,” Mangiamelli said. “Limiting the fencing to one structure and not three should be much more acceptable to the community.”

A week ago, public officials were provided a forum for their stance on the viaduct proposal that will be presented before the electorate on Jan. 15. At that time Councilmen John Lohr and Joe Held could not be reached for comment.

This week both were contacted, and while Held said he had no comment, Lohr said he was actively supportive of the proposal.

From a standpoint of safety, convenience and ancillary benefits, he said he would promote the project and try to find answers and solutions to people’s concerns. He said he already has drafted a plan regarding fencing along the tracks.

Viaducts would insure “an additional measure of safety, not just potential train and vehicular collisions,” but emergency access to the south side,” Lohr said. “With the very real possibility of a third rail coming through town ... I have been told it is in the works ... getting a safety vehicle from one side to another in a timely manner is exacerbated.”

He said the Third Avenue and 12th Avenue viaducts and 18th Avenue pedestrian would “knit the town together.”

From an economic standpoint, Lohr said south side businesses could obtain new customers from his ward if viaducts were installed.

Although his ward is not directly impacted by the proposal, after talking with some of his constituents, “I just feel many people in my ward are not going to go to the south side to go shopping because they have to wait for a train too often,” Lohr said, so viaducts would increase business if a portion of those people began soliciting those businesses as a result of the viaducts.

After finding out about the fencing requirement clarification, Lohr, who had taken it upon himself to recruit service organizations to landscape and maintain the fencing prior to the clarification, said this should affect the fencing argument from nay-sayers who had stated the city would be divided by a fence if this project is approved.

The city will not be divided by one long fence, he said, but for the fencing that will be in place, “I will personally talk to service clubs to adopt the fence, to landscape and decorate it.”