Aesthetics vs. Cost
are those cool-looking bricks worth the money?
Trevor Kupfer, photos by Andrea Paulseth |
What price tag do you put on aesthetics? How much are you willing to pay for colored concrete versus asphalt, landscaping instead of hanging baskets, or archways as opposed to banners? These are the kinds of public amenities that some argue define an area, make you proud to live there, and attract visitors – well worth the cost. For others, it’s a hefty financial burden for something with indefinite resulting benefits.
This is a debate continually shaking out in Eau Claire, most recently as it relates to the use of decorative concrete pavers like those in Phoenix Park.
“It’s not just cheap cheap cheap – that wouldn’t serve the public well – we have to be good stewards for the long-term interests of the city.” – City Council President Kerry Kincaid on choosing amenities for public projects
“Anything that costs more than normal … or is viewed as extra will receive more scrutiny in times like these,” said Brian Amundson, director of Public Works.
Amundson and the city council recently discussed the paver problem in the Madison Street crosswalk to Phoenix Park. Installed in 2005, this particular patch of pavers has given way to potholes and necessitates asphalt fill before proper maintenance in spring. This is occurring far earlier than anticipated, hence the concern, Amundson said.
While some on city council believe this is reason to take elements like these out of designers’ hands for fear of long-term maintenance costs, Amundson said this particular case is one where they should have prepared for higher traffic volume and weight. The Phoenix Park pavers were installed with sand around them, which is fine for slow traffic or low volume. But at that intersection they should have installed them with asphalt like on Water Street, where they haven’t had a problem since the completion in 2003, Amundson added.
Regardless, issues like this one and the state of the budget have prompted some on city council to step back and question whether the city really needs anything more than the bare minimum. And these kinds of debates aren’t exclusive to pavers. A similar discussion shook out last year about light poles downtown, where one camp pushed for the gooseneck decorative ones (pedestrian scale) and another for the silver spun aluminum ones (highway scale).
crosswalk to Phoenix Park in downtown
Eau Claire have formed potholes far
earlier than expected, causing some to
question their fiscal viability , despite how
awesome they look.
“We ended up down the middle,” City Council President Kerry Kincaid said, referring to their compromise between the most expensive and cheapest options. “I think our community now gets what quality development looks like,” she said, citing Phoenix Park’s role in shaping that mindset. “It’s not just cheap cheap cheap – that wouldn’t serve the public well – we have to be good stewards for the long-term interests of the city.”
It’s about more than just choosing amenities that look pretty, Kincaid said. In the case of Phoenix Park, it’s about creating markers that designate multimodal travel (bikers and walkers welcome), plus wayfaring (look this way for parks and trails), and placemaking (look at this awesome area). Balancing that with cost and durability is the trick, she said.
Assuming the pavers and light poles issues aren’t coincidences specific to these two amenities, this debate in fact speaks to the larger issue of Aesthetics Vs. Cost. So what does this mean for Eau Claire at a time when we’re on the precipice of the largest reconstruction that downtown has seen in nearly 50 years?
“I think the underbelly of your question is, ‘Are we going to scale back?’ ” Kincaid said, then pausing to reflect on her stance. “And I would say, ‘I hope not.’ ”
