The Brent Spence Bridge, which carries I-71 and I-75 over the Ohio River between Cincinnati OH and Covington KY, has long since been declared functionally obsolete. I found this Cincinnati Enquirer Special Report (http://www.cincinnati.com/news/bridge/), which I found relevant and insightful, and only after reading half of it did I realize it was published in September 2003! Yes, this is an issue that has been out there for a long time. Plans to develop its replacement/twinning are underway, but with no construction imminently scheduled.
In August, a Finding of No Significant Impact (http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D08/Newsreleases/Pages/Brent-Spence-project-clears-major-hurdle0814-1431.aspx) was issued, meaning that an EIS will not be necessary. One thing I find interesting, from a roadgeek-perspective, is that (unless I'm reading the recommended alternative maps wrong) the I-71/I-75 concurrency would no longer exist at all in Ohio. I-71 would cross the river using the Brent Spence Bridge, while I-75 traffic would use the new span.
Funding the project has always been the biggest issue, and now the PR war is beginning to heat up (http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20121127/BIZ/311270137/Dueling-Brent-Spence-toll-campaigns-begin?odyssey=tab%7Ctopnews%7Ctext%7C&nclick_check=1) between those on either side of the tolling debate. That includes TV campaigns -- just a month removed from the skull-smashing Moroun spots back in my native Michigan, now I get stuck with more bridge ads here in Ohio. In favor of an expedited schedule (which would almost certainly involve a tolled bridge) is a consortium (http://buildournewbridgenow.com/) made up of a laundry list of Cincinnati-area companies and organizations. Ohio governor John Kasich and Kentucky governor Steve Beshear are also in favor of tolls. Opposed to tolling is a tea party group, as well as a local lawyer / radio host. The Kentucky legislature isn't keen on the idea either.
I saw one old thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=2340) on this, but nothing posted recently. This project is probably worth a thread for discussion, although sadly I imagine it's going to be little more than real-world political bickering for the next couple years.
FHWA project website: http://www.brentspencebridgecorridor.com/
Quote from: The Great Zo on November 28, 2012, 06:07:28 AM
The Brent Spence Bridge, which carries I-71 and I-75 over the Ohio River between Cincinnati OH and Covington KY, has long since been declared functionally obsolete. I found this Cincinnati Enquirer Special Report (http://www.cincinnati.com/news/bridge/), which I found relevant and insightful, and only after reading half of it did I realize it was published in September 2003! Yes, this is an issue that has been out there for a long time. Plans to develop its replacement/twinning are underway, but with no construction imminently scheduled.
In August, a Finding of No Significant Impact (http://www.dot.state.oh.us/districts/D08/Newsreleases/Pages/Brent-Spence-project-clears-major-hurdle0814-1431.aspx) was issued, meaning that an EIS will not be necessary. One thing I find interesting, from a roadgeek-perspective, is that (unless I'm reading the recommended alternative maps wrong) the I-71/I-75 concurrency would no longer exist at all in Ohio. I-71 would cross the river using the Brent Spence Bridge, while I-75 traffic would use the new span.
Funding the project has always been the biggest issue, and now the PR war is beginning to heat up (http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20121127/BIZ/311270137/Dueling-Brent-Spence-toll-campaigns-begin?odyssey=tab%7Ctopnews%7Ctext%7C&nclick_check=1) between those on either side of the tolling debate. That includes TV campaigns -- just a month removed from the skull-smashing Moroun spots back in my native Michigan, now I get stuck with more bridge ads here in Ohio. In favor of an expedited schedule (which would almost certainly involve a tolled bridge) is a consortium (http://buildournewbridgenow.com/) made up of a laundry list of Cincinnati-area companies and organizations. Ohio governor John Kasich and Kentucky governor Steve Beshear are also in favor of tolls. Opposed to tolling is a tea party group, as well as a local lawyer / radio host. The Kentucky legislature isn't keen on the idea either.
Would the radio host/lawyer type be Bill Cunningham?
I love the idea of tolls. With congestion being the biggest problem, nothing alleviates congestion more than a tollbooth! :pan:
Proposed signage:
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpf1/t31.0-8/10694373_10152831118789784_7525962001533845411_o.jpg)
Quote from: Sherman Cahal on October 29, 2014, 04:18:02 PM
Proposed signage:
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpf1/t31.0-8/10694373_10152831118789784_7525962001533845411_o.jpg)
Wow, those are all going to be Exit 1B? That's the sort of thing I've seen with Caltrans, but didn't expect to see it pop up here (isn't there an "alphabet soup" of suffixed exit numbers here?).
Quote from: andy3175 on November 03, 2014, 11:00:30 PM
Quote from: Sherman Cahal on October 29, 2014, 04:18:02 PM
Proposed signage:
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpf1/t31.0-8/10694373_10152831118789784_7525962001533845411_o.jpg)
Wow, those are all going to be Exit 1B? That's the sort of thing I've seen with Caltrans, but didn't expect to see it pop up here (isn't there an "alphabet soup" of suffixed exit numbers here?).
There is, but you're past most of the alphabet by this point. I'm guessing this sign gantry is on 75 SB just after the Freeman Ave / Gest St exit (which I'm assuming isn't changing significantly). All these exits are getting the same designation because they diverge from the mainline together.
As for graphic critique... everything's pattern accurate, except most of the legend in Arial, plus mixed-case cardinals? Also, lane spacing is way off; the layout will have to be changed to fix it.
Quote from: DevalDragon on December 05, 2012, 11:08:46 AM
I love the idea of tolls. With congestion being the biggest problem, nothing alleviates congestion more than a tollbooth! :pan:
It'll be AET, no booths required.
Quote from: The Great Zo on November 28, 2012, 06:07:28 AM
One thing I find interesting, from a roadgeek-perspective, is that (unless I'm reading the recommended alternative maps wrong) the I-71/I-75 concurrency would no longer exist at all in Ohio. I-71 would cross the river using the Brent Spence Bridge, while I-75 traffic would use the new span.
Yep (though it's with 71 using both bridges, north on the old one & south on the new one)
I can't seem to find a still pic of the bridge deck rendering (I had seen one somewhere before), but it does appear in this newly posted video at the 2:12 mark:
Quote from: DevalDragon on December 05, 2012, 11:08:46 AM
I love the idea of tolls. With congestion being the biggest problem, nothing alleviates congestion more than a tollbooth! :pan:
The congestion is due to the shape and length of I-275, leaving no reasonable bypass alternative to driving through city center on either I-71 or I-75; tolls will do absolutely nothing to alleviate this.
I-471 is a bypass of I-71. It probably gets just as busy.
Quote from: NE2 on February 09, 2015, 04:05:50 PM
I-471 is a bypass of I-71. It probably gets just as busy.
It does not get even half as busy, any congestion on I-471 is from commuters at peak hours. The interstate does not connect back to I-71 and instead heads southeast to end at I-275 right by the Hwy 9/AA Highway's interchange with I-275. Hwy 9/AA Highway runs NW-SE across northeastern Kentucky, roughly paralleling the Ohio River from Newport to Grayson on I-64. The highway is Kentucky's answer for an express connection across this part of the state to serve as a backbone for road transportation from north KY to NE and east KY. There are a fair amount of interchanges with numerous controlled access sections, although most of these sections are of the Super-2, at-grade variety.
My family used to commute between Michigan and Kentucky for several years, and we would use US 23 in Michigan to 475>>75 in Ohio. We would travel down to KY on Fridays and back on Sundays for the most part and we experienced numerous traffic jams in all the notorious sections along this route. I did get to witness a lot of construction, like the 8 lane sections creeping north towards Dayton, the I-70/75 interchange reconstruction, and also the beginning of the reconstruction of the interchange with OH 4. The Brent Spence Bridge was always, without fail, the worst spot on the corridor if hit at any time other than late at night.
That being said, if the traffic back up from the Brent Spence was worse than normal (usually due to accidents, construction, or Bengals/Reds game fan exodus), we would use I-275 to I-71 to I-471 to I-275 back to I-71/75 in Kentucky and the reverse when northbound frequently. This would serve as a good bypass for us, even if adding miles and movements. However, at times when both routes would be clogged we would welcome either wide arcing I-275 loop.
The biggest congestion issues I've run into in the Cincinnati area (non-construction variety) have been well north of the river; in the area north of the Norwood Lateral toward Paddock Road, and from the northern end of the Lockland Split toward I-275.
Last time I was going to Dayton and knew I'd get caught in Cincinnati rush hour traffic, I took KY 11 to Maysville, then US 68 north to OH 73 and made my way over to Dayton. It beat the heck out of sitting in a standstill traffic jam on I-75.
That anti-toll bunch in northern Kentucky is going to end up costing them a new bridge.
Quote from: hbelkins on February 09, 2015, 10:07:06 PM
That anti-toll bunch in northern Kentucky is going to end up costing them a new bridge.
I agree, we need the new bridge, it is much more important than the Interstate 69 bridge over the Ohio River in Evansville
http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2015/05/11/ted-strickland-brent-spence-bridge-tolls/27147347/
I think this will be a worthwhile project for the Cincinnati area, but why are the proposed signs showing Exit 1B serving Covington? I've always thought that except in rare instances, exits in another state get their own number instead of sharing that in the one before (or after) it. In this case, Exit 192 in Covington is served by the proposed Exit 1B, which doesn't seem to be right at all.
The configuration with between the new bridge and the old bridge is very confusing. I cannot seem to find anything that makes sense for it because it seems like there will be I-71 on two different bridges as well as a straw set of lanes of the new bridge and one way traffic on the old. Very confusing. It should be I-75 on the top deck of the new one, and I-71 on the bottom deck of the new one. And lastly the new local traffic on the two decks of the existing bridge.
People demanding another bridge here would crap their pants if they went to New York City.
Damnit, still no progress.
http://www.cincinnati.com/story/money/2015/06/25/brent-spence-progress/29268619/
Three more years? Yawn.
http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2015/07/12/brent-spence-bridge-five-things/30025343/
:hmmm:
The only way this is probably going to get dealt with in anyone's lifetime is if you end up with another Minneapolis I-35W disaster. When the Brent Spence plunges into the Ohio everyone will quit bitching and set their agendas aside.
I hate to say it, but how else are you going to get these idiots off the dime?
Quote from: DeaconG on July 14, 2015, 02:55:41 PM
The only way this is probably going to get dealt with in anyone's lifetime is if you end up with another Minneapolis I-35W disaster. When the Brent Spence plunges into the Ohio everyone will quit bitching and set their agendas aside.
I hate to say it, but how else are you going to get these idiots off the dime?
The bridge isn't in that bad of condition but of course the I-35W bridge wasn't in horrible condition either. I could see that if the bridge isn't dealt with for 50+ years the thing will be more likely to be replaced because of collapsing or old age.
Oh, I'm not arguing that point at all. I have a saying I use when things start going off on a tangent-"Recriminations later, fix it NOW."
Stop the political posturing and pretending you're doing something for your constituents and get this thing done.
Quote from: DeaconG on July 14, 2015, 02:55:41 PM
The only way this is probably going to get dealt with in anyone's lifetime is if you end up with another Minneapolis I-35W disaster. When the Brent Spence plunges into the Ohio everyone will quit bitching and set their agendas aside.
There certanly are a lot of people out there trying to make it sound like the bridge is structurally deficient rather than just functionally obsolete. Of course cities that are functionally obsolete are extremely popular while ones that aren't seem to lose a lot of their intelligentsia to cities that are.
Honestly the main problem with the bridge is the connections on the Ohio side. If they were given a better layout, the bridge would not have as many problems, i've only really used the lower deck, but having a good portion of it devoted to exit only lanes...wastes a lot of it. I've seen worse bridges not on the chopping block in terms of condition.
Quote from: SteveG1988 on July 16, 2015, 08:31:45 AM
Honestly the main problem with the bridge is the connections on the Ohio side. If they were given a better layout, the bridge would not have as many problems, i've only really used the lower deck, but having a good portion of it devoted to exit only lanes...wastes a lot of it. I've seen worse bridges not on the chopping block in terms of condition.
I think part of the problem is that I-75 only has 2 through lanes and I-71 only has that many too. I would love to see I-75 have 4 through lanes and I-71 have 3. With the current configuration it is possible to give I-75 3 through lanes by making of of the through lanes on the I-71 split an option lane. The other exits besides I-71 off I-75 in the interchange could be a C/D lane off I-71 to give access to US 50 and the downtown streets.
It appears ODOT is starting to get ROW for the new Brent Spence Bridge, even though actually building it will probably not happen for a long time. It also seems that tolling the new bridge will not be possible because of the Kentucky General Assembly's decision to not allow tolling of the new bridge, so the only way that funding for the bridge would be possible would be federal funding or imminent danger of collapse on the current bridge.
http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/05/15/downtown-roads-close-for-building-demolition.html
Also, I am not sure if I just haven't found it before, or it was uploaded recently, but ODOT has the official traffic pattern the new Brent Spence Bridge would use here.
http://www.brentspencebridgecorridor.com/uploads/pdfs/RecommendedAlternativeKentucky.pdf
http://www.brentspencebridgecorridor.com/uploads/pdfs/RecommendedAlternativeOhio.pdf
I find it very interesting how I-75 and I-71 use different carriageways, and I-71's northbound and southbound directions are split between the two bridges. It is very interesting how there are dedicated carriageways for exiting and entering traffic in Covington and Downtown Cincinnati.
Well, THIS won't be disastrous to the regular commute around here...said no resident of Cincinnati ever.
http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2017/06/13/two-months-hell-could-ahead-brent-spence-bridge-commuters/392524001/
Quote
On Monday, commuters in Greater Cincinnati will find out what fate awaits them this summer.
Lanes and exits surrounding the Brent Spence Bridge will be periodically shut down this summer, the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet announced Tuesday. There will be a press conference at 11 a.m. on June 19 at Devou Park where KYTC will discuss the closures.
Isn't the regular commute in Cincinnati pretty much always disastrous anyway?
Quote from: vtk on June 15, 2017, 03:39:23 AM
Isn't the regular commute in Cincinnati pretty much always disastrous anyway?
No more so than in any other large city.
Quote from: vtk on June 15, 2017, 03:39:23 AM
Isn't the regular commute in Cincinnati pretty much always disastrous anyway?
Definitely, I-75 gets major congestion even outside of commute hours, and I have seen the northbound approach to the Brent Spence Bridge congested on a Saturday (No wrecks or events). The Brent Spence Bridge and the I-75 construction causes the major traffic problems in Cincinnati, and closing exits around the Brent Spence is going to make traffic worse. It's a shame that the Kentucky General Assembly shunned tolls that could have let the new bridge be built at this time instead of waiting for federal funds that may never come, since the Public-Private partnerships Trump wants would guarantee tolling. Matt Bevin's eastern bypass idea, while it would be helpful for through traffic, would only take off some traffic from the Spence Bridge, and it would cost much more, wheras a connector between I-71 in Walton and I-471 MIGHT help more, but that was rejected all the way back in the 1980s, so that is unlikely.
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on May 18, 2017, 06:59:32 PM
Also, I am not sure if I just haven't found it before, or it was uploaded recently, but ODOT has the official traffic pattern the new Brent Spence Bridge would use here.
http://www.brentspencebridgecorridor.com/uploads/pdfs/RecommendedAlternativeKentucky.pdf
http://www.brentspencebridgecorridor.com/uploads/pdfs/RecommendedAlternativeOhio.pdf
Wow, is that one complicated piece of roadway. I've been looking at it for half and hour, and I can't really make heads or tails of it.
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on June 15, 2017, 11:19:07 PM
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on May 18, 2017, 06:59:32 PM
Also, I am not sure if I just haven't found it before, or it was uploaded recently, but ODOT has the official traffic pattern the new Brent Spence Bridge would use here.
http://www.brentspencebridgecorridor.com/uploads/pdfs/RecommendedAlternativeKentucky.pdf
http://www.brentspencebridgecorridor.com/uploads/pdfs/RecommendedAlternativeOhio.pdf
Wow, is that one complicated piece of roadway. I've been looking at it for half and hour, and I can't really make heads or tails of it.
Honestly its kind of disappointing with all those lanes yet none of them are HOV or express lanes. I could see a set of express lanes that go from downtown Cincinnati to Florence or wherever, but otherwise I'm not sure if its a good traffic design or not.
I travel from the Latonia area of Covington to the I-74/North Bend Rd. interchange northwest of Cincinnati five days/week. The Brent Spence is slow going even at 11:30 AM--traffic usually starts slowing around Kyles Lane (Exit 189) in Ft. Wright. Part of the slowdown is the Covington cut in the hill from Kyles to 12th St/MLK Jr. Blvd. at the base of the hill, the next slowdown is the merge from Pike St. onto I-71/75 North, the next slowdown is the merge from KY 8 to get on the bridge, and the final slowdown is the bridge itself because there are many commuters wary of traveling on it due to four closely spaced lanes with no breakdown lanes. The bridge was originally built with three lanes and a shoulder but was restriped for four due to the entrance ramp from KY 8 and an increase of traffic from Northern Kentucky into Cincinnati.
The bridge itself is structurally sound, although I see some concrete coming off the cross-beams in some spots. It has become functionally obsolete and has been for a long, long time--even before 1994 when I moved from Hampton Roads to Northern Kentucky. A new bridge is needed.
I may be in the minority here (probably waaaay in the minority), but I believe that for this to happen, I-71/75 should be closed at both approaches (I-71/75 ramps to the bridge in Cincinnati and the 5th St interchange in Covington), tear down the existing bridge, and build a new and better one in its spot with some extra ROW to accomplish this. Through traffic would have to be diverted to I-275 and I-471 if wanting to go to downtown Cincinnati, and I-275 around the east side of Cincinnati to get back to I-71 and I-75 north of the city. A motorist still could go west of the city on I-275 if going to Indianapolis or even toward Dayton. Yes, this would be taxing, however, this new bridge could be built quicker without having to contend with traffic and the old bridge in the way.
Continuing from my above post, I believe the slowdowns would have been lessened if one, or both, of the Covington entrance ramps were never built--especially the one from KY 8 at the bridge, even though this entrance is its own lane. However, many motorists have to move left over two lanes on the bridge to go on I-75 North. Much of the slowdown is due to the weaving factor at each entrance ramp as a motorist has to move left one or two lanes over to go on I-75 along with some motorists having to move right one lane over to go on I-71 North. Fun to deal with every day, huh?
It is too bad I-71/75 wasn't built along the rail line from Ft. Mitchell down the hill through Ludlow, crossing the Ohio River next to (east of) the current railroad bridge, and meeting up with the current I-75 at the curve near Freeman Ave/Ezzard Charles. I-71 could have split off there following the current I-75 South and having a continuous freeway through to Ft. Washington Way instead of the maze of ramps currently there.
Of course, Covington leaders would have been up in arms because they would have felt that they were bypassed by the Interstate System (need an echo for emphasis). What should have happened to what is there currently is that a larger bridge should have been built in the first place. One with four lanes and shoulders. And it still could be double-decked like it is now.
Oh well, hindsight is 20/20!
Considering the Covington Mayor has said that he wants a smaller Brent Spence Project, your idea would probably entail what a "smaller" Brent Spence project is. Also, I have never realized that the KY 8 on-ramp onto the Brent Spence Bridge caused so many problems, I was thinking that only 2 through lanes for I-75 was a bigger problem.
Quote from: vtk on June 15, 2017, 03:39:23 AM
Isn't the regular commute in Cincinnati pretty much always disastrous anyway?
Normally, getting from Florence to downtown takes about 25 minutes in the morning drive time. As mentioned, part of the issue is the northbound entrances from Covington and the resulting weaving to access 75 in Ohio. However, delays usually start well in advance of the bridge -- right around I-275. Of course, if you have a crash at any point in that stretch, all bets are off.
There is a temporary ban on northbound truck traffic on the Ohio side through Fort Washington Way and the Lytle Tunnel on I-71 which has at least temporarily alleviated some of the problems as trucks are rerouted to 275 to 471 to 71. But, that ban only runs through August.
What work will be performed?
Quote from: seicer on June 19, 2017, 10:19:41 AM
What work will be performed?
I think that will be unveiled/discussed at a press conference tomorrow. But what I don't understand is why the exit to KY 236 at Erlanger will be closed in conjunction with this project.
Quote from: hbelkins on June 19, 2017, 12:49:49 PM
Quote from: seicer on June 19, 2017, 10:19:41 AM
What work will be performed?
I think that will be unveiled/discussed at a press conference tomorrow. But what I don't understand is why the exit to KY 236 at Erlanger will be closed in conjunction with this project.
I asked your D6 colleague about that. The response was that it will allow for free flow of traffic on I-275 entering southbound I-75/71.
The press conference was today. The work to be done is routine maintenance to include replacement of joints and the driving surfaces, replacement of lighting (especially on the bottom deck which, IMO, badly needs it), and repair of other concrete and steel.
Work begins Friday night at 9pm with the bridge being down to 1 lane for a period of time to place barrier walls. The traffic pattern by Monday morning will consist of all traffic using the two westernmost lanes, with access to the bridge from 3rd Street and westbound Fort Washington Way (aka I-71 south/US 50 west) in Cincy and from 4th Street in Covington being shut down along with the aforementioned closure of the exit to KY 236. The project is being done in 3 phases, two lanes at a time, and the ramp closures will be in effect for all three.
Quote from: vtk on June 15, 2017, 03:39:23 AM
Isn't the regular commute in Cincinnati pretty much always disastrous anyway?
Ahaha, people from Columbus think every other city's traffic is terrible.
Quote from: JMoses24 on June 19, 2017, 02:51:02 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on June 19, 2017, 12:49:49 PM
Quote from: seicer on June 19, 2017, 10:19:41 AM
What work will be performed?
I think that will be unveiled/discussed at a press conference tomorrow. But what I don't understand is why the exit to KY 236 at Erlanger will be closed in conjunction with this project.
I asked your D6 colleague about that. The response was that it will allow for free flow of traffic on I-275 entering southbound I-75/71.
I asked her myself, then saw that you'd asked on the D6 page. The public response was more polite than the response she gave me. I'd forgotten about the weave between 275 traffic merging on to 71/75, and 71/75 traffic moving to the right to exit on 236. She called it a cluster#%&@ during normal conditions in her message to me. (For some reason, I thought it was the northbound exit that was closing, not the southbound one).
If I was coming south on 71 and wanted to access 75, I'd use the Norwood Lateral instead of 471 and 275.
Quote from: hbelkins on June 19, 2017, 10:28:12 PM
Quote from: JMoses24 on June 19, 2017, 02:51:02 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on June 19, 2017, 12:49:49 PM
Quote from: seicer on June 19, 2017, 10:19:41 AM
What work will be performed?
I think that will be unveiled/discussed at a press conference tomorrow. But what I don't understand is why the exit to KY 236 at Erlanger will be closed in conjunction with this project.
I asked your D6 colleague about that. The response was that it will allow for free flow of traffic on I-275 entering southbound I-75/71.
I asked her myself, then saw that you'd asked on the D6 page. The public response was more polite than the response she gave me. I'd forgotten about the weave between 275 traffic merging on to 71/75, and 71/75 traffic moving to the right to exit on 236. She called it a cluster#%&@ during normal conditions in her message to me. (For some reason, I thought it was the northbound exit that was closing, not the southbound one).
If I was coming south on 71 and wanted to access 75, I'd use the Norwood Lateral instead of 471 and 275.
Problem with the Norwood Lateral idea is that 71 is a cluster#%&@ due to both the ongoing MLK interchange project AND repaving and bridge work pretty much from the Lateral into the Lytle Tunnel. Now you add this project to the mix...pretty obvious why they aren't recommending the Lateral. Not to mention, 562 isn't exactly 2017 Interstate-standard.
And yes, the Donaldson collector southbound is, indeed, a similar cluster#%&@ under the normal conditions.
Quote from: GCrites80s on June 19, 2017, 09:10:21 PM
Quote from: vtk on June 15, 2017, 03:39:23 AM
Isn't the regular commute in Cincinnati pretty much always disastrous anyway?
Ahaha, people from Columbus think every other city's traffic is terrible.
Yours isn't exactly a cakewalk. One phrase: 71/70 East Split.
The replacement might have been finished by now if it wasn't for all the babyishness.
Yesterday I got a chance to go across the Brent Spence bridge while it wasn't massively congested. Construction workers were in the work zone even on the 4th of July, so the contractor sure is working overtime to get this project done by August.
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4143/34907148174_978e53a16c_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/VbCg1j) (https://flic.kr/p/VbCg1j) (https://www.flickr.com/photos/133197723@N05/)
Going northbound on the bridge, the crappy signage is blocked out.
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4065/35579073832_bc72c66110_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/Wd146s) (https://flic.kr/p/Wd146s) (https://www.flickr.com/photos/133197723@N05/)
Going southbound on the bridge, this shot makes the bridge look weirdly like the old Goethals bridge, where there are 2 thin lanes going each way (in this case, only southbound), and there is a solid white line between the lanes.
But basically, the traffic on the approaches to the bridge is hell during most of the daytime.
I have not gone north on the bridge since the work started--I have taken I-275 East to I-471 North to I-71/US 50 West to get to I-75 North from Northern Kentucky, as the time I travel this is between 11:30 AM-12 noon. Coming back home at night going south on the bridge has been no problem after 10 PM.
It was pretty much hell on Independence Day as included in the backup was a traffic collision at Kyles Lane (Exit 189), which shut down the two right northbound lanes and had traffic backed up to the KY 18 interchange (Exit 181). I'll bet I-275 East was fairly crowded also. Fortunately, I was at home, off work, and did not have to deal with this.
I occasionally go to Cincinnati for work, typically taking either 71 or 75 almost all the way to the Brent Spence. Are there good alternate routes I should consider? My destination is the railroad yard accessed from Gest St, and I could be going there anytime between 5pm and 5am.
Quote from: vtk on July 13, 2017, 08:11:45 AM
I occasionally go to Cincinnati for work, typically taking either 71 or 75 almost all the way to the Brent Spence. Are there good alternate routes I should consider? My destination is the railroad yard accessed from Gest St, and I could be going there anytime between 5pm and 5am.
I would recommend getting off 75 at Kyles Lane/KY 1072, because that's where the backup usually starts, but sometimes it starts earlier. Follow US 25 into Covington and then use the Clay Wade Bailey Bridge, then take 3rd street to Gest Street.
Polling finds that 61% of voters would find a $1 toll "acceptable" to fund Brent Spence Bridge "improvements".
http://www.wcpo.com/news/transportation-development/brent-spence-bridge-majority-ok-with-1-toll-to-fund-brent-spence-bridge-improvements-survey-finds
But seriously, wouldn't a $1 toll literally only be enough to cover the electronic toll gantry, and the administrative costs of sorting through the unrecognized license plates and sending mail for bill by plate and toll violations? I would guess for the actual replacement bridge to be built, a $4.50 non E-ZPASS toll and a $4 E-ZPASS/Riverlink toll. A $2.50 non E-ZPASS toll could fund a deck replacement and other overhauls to the bridge.
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on July 13, 2017, 10:17:02 AM
Quote from: vtk on July 13, 2017, 08:11:45 AM
I occasionally go to Cincinnati for work, typically taking either 71 or 75 almost all the way to the Brent Spence. Are there good alternate routes I should consider? My destination is the railroad yard accessed from Gest St, and I could be going there anytime between 5pm and 5am.
I would recommend getting off 75 at Kyles Lane/KY 1072, because that's where the backup usually starts, but sometimes it starts earlier. Follow US 25 into Covington and then use the Clay Wade Bailey Bridge, then take 3rd street to Gest Street.
I think he's coming in from the north.
Quote from: hbelkins on July 13, 2017, 11:01:54 AM
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on July 13, 2017, 10:17:02 AM
Quote from: vtk on July 13, 2017, 08:11:45 AM
I occasionally go to Cincinnati for work, typically taking either 71 or 75 almost all the way to the Brent Spence. Are there good alternate routes I should consider? My destination is the railroad yard accessed from Gest St, and I could be going there anytime between 5pm and 5am.
I would recommend getting off 75 at Kyles Lane/KY 1072, because that's where the backup usually starts, but sometimes it starts earlier. Follow US 25 into Covington and then use the Clay Wade Bailey Bridge, then take 3rd street to Gest Street.
I think he's coming in from the north.
In that case US 42 to 9th Street would probably be the best bet, although I'm not sure how congested I-71 gets.
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on July 13, 2017, 11:55:34 AM
Quote from: hbelkins on July 13, 2017, 11:01:54 AM
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on July 13, 2017, 10:17:02 AM
Quote from: vtk on July 13, 2017, 08:11:45 AM
I occasionally go to Cincinnati for work, typically taking either 71 or 75 almost all the way to the Brent Spence. Are there good alternate routes I should consider? My destination is the railroad yard accessed from Gest St, and I could be going there anytime between 5pm and 5am.
I would recommend getting off 75 at Kyles Lane/KY 1072, because that's where the backup usually starts, but sometimes it starts earlier. Follow US 25 into Covington and then use the Clay Wade Bailey Bridge, then take 3rd street to Gest Street.
I think he's coming in from the north.
In that case US 42 to 9th Street would probably be the best bet, although I'm not sure how congested I-71 gets.
I-71 delays typically begin at Taft. So, I would be inclined to suggest taking the Western Avenue exit and then staying on it to Gest. Of course, at the early end of that timeframe you're hosed no matter what.
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on July 13, 2017, 11:55:34 AM
US 42 to 9th Street would probably be the best bet, although I'm not sure how congested I-71 gets.
Quote from: JMoses24 on July 13, 2017, 06:02:56 PM
I-71 delays typically begin at Taft. So, I would be inclined to suggest taking the Western Avenue exit and then staying on it to Gest. Of course, at the early end of that timeframe you're hosed no matter what.
Thanks for the suggestions.
Quote from: hbelkins on July 13, 2017, 11:01:54 AM
I think she's coming in from the north.
Thanks for the context I neglected to include.
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on July 13, 2017, 10:24:09 AM
Polling finds that 61% of voters would find a $1 toll "acceptable" to fund Brent Spence Bridge "improvements".
http://www.wcpo.com/news/transportation-development/brent-spence-bridge-majority-ok-with-1-toll-to-fund-brent-spence-bridge-improvements-survey-finds
But seriously, wouldn't a $1 toll literally only be enough to cover the electronic toll gantry, and the administrative costs of sorting through the unrecognized license plates and sending mail for bill by plate and toll violations? I would guess for the actual replacement bridge to be built, a $4.50 non E-ZPASS toll and a $4 E-ZPASS/Riverlink toll. A $2.50 non E-ZPASS toll could fund a deck replacement and other overhauls to the bridge.
Louisville's Ohio River Bridges project cost 2.3 billion and they're paying it with $1 for frequent commuters, $2 for cars, $5 for 3&4 axle, $10 for 5 axles or more (Riverlink/EZ Pass transponder rates). What hasn't been discussed much is that tolls are staying for at least 40 years and will go up with inflation. The same low tolls can be done with Brent Spence, but expect to spend decades paying for it.
Quote from: ukfan758 on July 15, 2017, 02:21:34 AM
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on July 13, 2017, 10:24:09 AM
Polling finds that 61% of voters would find a $1 toll "acceptable" to fund Brent Spence Bridge "improvements".
http://www.wcpo.com/news/transportation-development/brent-spence-bridge-majority-ok-with-1-toll-to-fund-brent-spence-bridge-improvements-survey-finds
But seriously, wouldn't a $1 toll literally only be enough to cover the electronic toll gantry, and the administrative costs of sorting through the unrecognized license plates and sending mail for bill by plate and toll violations? I would guess for the actual replacement bridge to be built, a $4.50 non E-ZPASS toll and a $4 E-ZPASS/Riverlink toll. A $2.50 non E-ZPASS toll could fund a deck replacement and other overhauls to the bridge.
Louisville's Ohio River Bridges project cost 2.3 billion and they're paying it with $1 for frequent commuters, $2 for cars, $5 for 3&4 axle, $10 for 5 axles or more (Riverlink/EZ Pass transponder rates). What hasn't been discussed much is that tolls are staying for at least 40 years and will go up with inflation. The same low tolls can be done with Brent Spence, but expect to spend decades paying for it.
I imagine that the majority of users of a tolled Brent Spence Bridge would not be EZ Pass or Riverlink users, only because there aren't any tolls in the Cincinnati area, so adoption would be slow. There would certainly be a drop in traffic temporarily, much like the I-65 bridge had, but it might take a while for traffic to go back up since I-471 and the Clay Wade Bailey Bridge are nearby. If it happens, it might finally be time for me to replace my Sunpass with an NC Quick Pass :nod:
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on July 15, 2017, 01:16:56 PM
Quote from: ukfan758 on July 15, 2017, 02:21:34 AM
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on July 13, 2017, 10:24:09 AM
Polling finds that 61% of voters would find a $1 toll "acceptable" to fund Brent Spence Bridge "improvements".
http://www.wcpo.com/news/transportation-development/brent-spence-bridge-majority-ok-with-1-toll-to-fund-brent-spence-bridge-improvements-survey-finds
But seriously, wouldn't a $1 toll literally only be enough to cover the electronic toll gantry, and the administrative costs of sorting through the unrecognized license plates and sending mail for bill by plate and toll violations? I would guess for the actual replacement bridge to be built, a $4.50 non E-ZPASS toll and a $4 E-ZPASS/Riverlink toll. A $2.50 non E-ZPASS toll could fund a deck replacement and other overhauls to the bridge.
Louisville's Ohio River Bridges project cost 2.3 billion and they're paying it with $1 for frequent commuters, $2 for cars, $5 for 3&4 axle, $10 for 5 axles or more (Riverlink/EZ Pass transponder rates). What hasn't been discussed much is that tolls are staying for at least 40 years and will go up with inflation. The same low tolls can be done with Brent Spence, but expect to spend decades paying for it.
I imagine that the majority of users of a tolled Brent Spence Bridge would not be EZ Pass or Riverlink users, only because there aren't any tolls in the Cincinnati area, so adoption would be slow. There would certainly be a drop in traffic temporarily, much like the I-65 bridge had, but it might take a while for traffic to go back up since I-471 and the Clay Wade Bailey Bridge are nearby. If it happens, it might finally be time for me to replace my Sunpass with an NC Quick Pass :nod:
There weren't any tolls in the Louisville area either.
Quote from: hbelkins on July 15, 2017, 11:14:40 PM
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on July 15, 2017, 01:16:56 PM
Quote from: ukfan758 on July 15, 2017, 02:21:34 AM
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on July 13, 2017, 10:24:09 AM
Polling finds that 61% of voters would find a $1 toll "acceptable" to fund Brent Spence Bridge "improvements".
http://www.wcpo.com/news/transportation-development/brent-spence-bridge-majority-ok-with-1-toll-to-fund-brent-spence-bridge-improvements-survey-finds
But seriously, wouldn't a $1 toll literally only be enough to cover the electronic toll gantry, and the administrative costs of sorting through the unrecognized license plates and sending mail for bill by plate and toll violations? I would guess for the actual replacement bridge to be built, a $4.50 non E-ZPASS toll and a $4 E-ZPASS/Riverlink toll. A $2.50 non E-ZPASS toll could fund a deck replacement and other overhauls to the bridge.
Louisville's Ohio River Bridges project cost 2.3 billion and they're paying it with $1 for frequent commuters, $2 for cars, $5 for 3&4 axle, $10 for 5 axles or more (Riverlink/EZ Pass transponder rates). What hasn't been discussed much is that tolls are staying for at least 40 years and will go up with inflation. The same low tolls can be done with Brent Spence, but expect to spend decades paying for it.
I imagine that the majority of users of a tolled Brent Spence Bridge would not be EZ Pass or Riverlink users, only because there aren't any tolls in the Cincinnati area, so adoption would be slow. There would certainly be a drop in traffic temporarily, much like the I-65 bridge had, but it might take a while for traffic to go back up since I-471 and the Clay Wade Bailey Bridge are nearby. If it happens, it might finally be time for me to replace my Sunpass with an NC Quick Pass :nod:
There weren't any tolls in the Louisville area either.
How fast has adoption of EZ Pass/Riverlink been in Louisville?
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on July 16, 2017, 12:53:44 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on July 15, 2017, 11:14:40 PM
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on July 15, 2017, 01:16:56 PM
Quote from: ukfan758 on July 15, 2017, 02:21:34 AM
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on July 13, 2017, 10:24:09 AM
Polling finds that 61% of voters would find a $1 toll "acceptable" to fund Brent Spence Bridge "improvements".
http://www.wcpo.com/news/transportation-development/brent-spence-bridge-majority-ok-with-1-toll-to-fund-brent-spence-bridge-improvements-survey-finds
But seriously, wouldn't a $1 toll literally only be enough to cover the electronic toll gantry, and the administrative costs of sorting through the unrecognized license plates and sending mail for bill by plate and toll violations? I would guess for the actual replacement bridge to be built, a $4.50 non E-ZPASS toll and a $4 E-ZPASS/Riverlink toll. A $2.50 non E-ZPASS toll could fund a deck replacement and other overhauls to the bridge.
Louisville's Ohio River Bridges project cost 2.3 billion and they're paying it with $1 for frequent commuters, $2 for cars, $5 for 3&4 axle, $10 for 5 axles or more (Riverlink/EZ Pass transponder rates). What hasn't been discussed much is that tolls are staying for at least 40 years and will go up with inflation. The same low tolls can be done with Brent Spence, but expect to spend decades paying for it.
I imagine that the majority of users of a tolled Brent Spence Bridge would not be EZ Pass or Riverlink users, only because there aren't any tolls in the Cincinnati area, so adoption would be slow. There would certainly be a drop in traffic temporarily, much like the I-65 bridge had, but it might take a while for traffic to go back up since I-471 and the Clay Wade Bailey Bridge are nearby. If it happens, it might finally be time for me to replace my Sunpass with an NC Quick Pass :nod:
There weren't any tolls in the Louisville area either.
How fast has adoption of EZ Pass/Riverlink been in Louisville?
According to a news article back in April: http://www.wdrb.com/story/35225397/traffic-increasing-on-ohio-river-toll-bridges-riverlink-says
"The data released Monday also indicates that more people are opening RiverLink accounts, giving them the ability to pay the lowest toll rate. When tolls started at the end of December, there were 78,500 accounts; by the end of March, 107,550 accounts had been created."
"Nearly 275,000 transponders had been issued by the end of March, a 60 percent increase since the start of tolling. Local transponders, which work on the three bridges between Louisville and Clark County, Ind., made up 85 percent of the devices."
I assume that the number has increased. The sticker transponders are quite common in the east end of Louisville, I haven't seen many of the EZ Pass transponders though. Now for actual usage of the bridges, the article says there was about 15,000 a day on the Lewis and Clark and around 70,000 on the downtown bridges. They've also started selling them in stores. http://www.wdrb.com/story/35749925/prepaid-riverlink-transponders-start-hitting-store-shelves-in-louisville
Quote from: ukfan758 on July 17, 2017, 05:44:21 PM
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on July 16, 2017, 12:53:44 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on July 15, 2017, 11:14:40 PM
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on July 15, 2017, 01:16:56 PM
Quote from: ukfan758 on July 15, 2017, 02:21:34 AM
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on July 13, 2017, 10:24:09 AM
Polling finds that 61% of voters would find a $1 toll "acceptable" to fund Brent Spence Bridge "improvements".
http://www.wcpo.com/news/transportation-development/brent-spence-bridge-majority-ok-with-1-toll-to-fund-brent-spence-bridge-improvements-survey-finds
But seriously, wouldn't a $1 toll literally only be enough to cover the electronic toll gantry, and the administrative costs of sorting through the unrecognized license plates and sending mail for bill by plate and toll violations? I would guess for the actual replacement bridge to be built, a $4.50 non E-ZPASS toll and a $4 E-ZPASS/Riverlink toll. A $2.50 non E-ZPASS toll could fund a deck replacement and other overhauls to the bridge.
Louisville's Ohio River Bridges project cost 2.3 billion and they're paying it with $1 for frequent commuters, $2 for cars, $5 for 3&4 axle, $10 for 5 axles or more (Riverlink/EZ Pass transponder rates). What hasn't been discussed much is that tolls are staying for at least 40 years and will go up with inflation. The same low tolls can be done with Brent Spence, but expect to spend decades paying for it.
I imagine that the majority of users of a tolled Brent Spence Bridge would not be EZ Pass or Riverlink users, only because there aren't any tolls in the Cincinnati area, so adoption would be slow. There would certainly be a drop in traffic temporarily, much like the I-65 bridge had, but it might take a while for traffic to go back up since I-471 and the Clay Wade Bailey Bridge are nearby. If it happens, it might finally be time for me to replace my Sunpass with an NC Quick Pass :nod:
There weren't any tolls in the Louisville area either.
How fast has adoption of EZ Pass/Riverlink been in Louisville?
According to a news article back in April: http://www.wdrb.com/story/35225397/traffic-increasing-on-ohio-river-toll-bridges-riverlink-says
"The data released Monday also indicates that more people are opening RiverLink accounts, giving them the ability to pay the lowest toll rate. When tolls started at the end of December, there were 78,500 accounts; by the end of March, 107,550 accounts had been created."
"Nearly 275,000 transponders had been issued by the end of March, a 60 percent increase since the start of tolling. Local transponders, which work on the three bridges between Louisville and Clark County, Ind., made up 85 percent of the devices."
I assume that the number has increased. The sticker transponders are quite common in the east end of Louisville, I haven't seen many of the EZ Pass transponders though. Now for actual usage of the bridges, the article says there was about 15,000 a day on the Lewis and Clark and around 70,000 on the downtown bridges. They've also started selling them in stores. http://www.wdrb.com/story/35749925/prepaid-riverlink-transponders-start-hitting-store-shelves-in-louisville
Hm, not bad. Considering the amount of commuters that cross the Brent Spence Bridge, it is likely that at least 1/4 of the AADT of the Brent Spence Bridge will get an EZ Pass or Riverlink (assuming that's what is used for the bridge) if they are put on store shelves and promoted.
Very little going on regarding this overall project, though I see Ohio has at least been working on right if way acquisition, and TRAC has approved $22.6M more for further right of way acquisition over the next 4 years.
There continues to be some very vocal opposition to tolls from some in northern Kentucky. The recently-defeated incumbent governor stated prior to the election that a new bridge couldn't be built without tolls. Some are attributing his loss in a couple of NKY counties to this statement.
I don't see it being a priority with Beshear because of the inherited deficit, unless it can be built with tolls but that may be political suicide.
Quote from: hbelkins on January 05, 2020, 07:30:08 PM
There continues to be some very vocal opposition to tolls from some in northern Kentucky. The recently-defeated incumbent governor stated prior to the election that a new bridge couldn't be built without tolls. Some are attributing his loss in a couple of NKY counties to this statement.
Among the other dumbass things he said and did.
Political pundits said Trump lost it for Bevin. No, Bevin lost it for Bevin. (steps off soapbox)
As far as tolls on the Brent Spence replacement--they are more than likely needed. Look at Louisville and what they are doing in the Hampton Roads area. Have to recoup something for the improvements.
If I can find an alternative way to avoid the tolls, I will do it--although it would be a bit difficult in the Louisville area without going out of the way. Example: if I wanted to travel to the Hubers Family Farm and Restaurant near Scottsville, IN from Cincinnati, to avoid the tolls, I would have to take I-64 west through Louisville into Indiana then take I-265 east to the State Street interchange or take US 50 out of Lawrenceburg, IN, US 421 to Madison, IN, IN 56 to Scottsburg, I-65 south to IN 60 west, to the country roads leading to Hubers. Somewhat out of the way and a bit time consuming.
At least in Cincinnati, there would be 3 free alternatives to go from Northern Kentucky to downtown Cincinnati.
I've engaged the biggest anti-toll voice (Stephen Frank, who is or was a Covington city commissioner) a few times. At first he said the tolling would put a strangling amount of traffic on city streets in Covington and Newport, and on the Clay Wade, Roebling, and Taylor-Southgate bridges; but now he says tolls would be a sop to Cincinnati's economic development and job recruitment efforts at a cost to jobs on the south side of the river. I think he just is against tolls and keeps trying to come up with a valid reason as to why.
Oh, that sop is also against funding libraries too. He's against anything that could be construed as a social good that uses his money (e.g. Medicaid/Medicare, libraries, public schools, etc.).
Quote from: seicer on January 06, 2020, 02:07:06 PM
Oh, that sop is also against funding libraries too. He's against anything that could be construed as a social good that uses his money (e.g. Medicaid/Medicare, libraries, public schools, etc.).
Steve Frank is basically useless.
Nobody around here wants tolls. Some have insisted on exploiting the issue to boost their political goals or economic interests, but the general public is firmly against tolls.
Quote from: bandit957 on January 06, 2020, 02:11:34 PM
Nobody around here wants tolls. Some have insisted on exploiting the issue to boost their political goals or economic interests, but the general public is firmly against tolls.
Then in 20 years, they'll still be complaining about congestion on that bridge. It ain't getting built without tolls.
I laugh at those who freak out and say they're afraid it's going to fall into the river and say that's why it needs to be replaced. It doesn't have any structural issues. It's functionally obsolete but not structurally deficient.
At least tolls would work out better than a sales tax increase, especially since it was only the "anti-tax" crowd that supported the tax increase.
Quote from: hbelkins on January 07, 2020, 11:39:02 AM
Quote from: bandit957 on January 06, 2020, 02:11:34 PM
Nobody around here wants tolls. Some have insisted on exploiting the issue to boost their political goals or economic interests, but the general public is firmly against tolls.
Then in 20 years, they'll still be complaining about congestion on that bridge. It ain't getting built without tolls.
I laugh at those who freak out and say they're afraid it's going to fall into the river and say that's why it needs to be replaced. It doesn't have any structural issues. It's functionally obsolete but not structurally deficient.
What about the Cincinnati side? HOT lanes on I-75 would be a good start, and I feel that they should've been included in the ongoing Mill Creek Expressway project.
If KY does not want the tolls, OH should be willing to pick up the tab, especially since they still have the Turnpike on the other side of the state.
Quote from: Henry on January 07, 2020, 11:48:30 AM
Quote from: hbelkins on January 07, 2020, 11:39:02 AM
Quote from: bandit957 on January 06, 2020, 02:11:34 PM
Nobody around here wants tolls. Some have insisted on exploiting the issue to boost their political goals or economic interests, but the general public is firmly against tolls.
Then in 20 years, they'll still be complaining about congestion on that bridge. It ain't getting built without tolls.
I laugh at those who freak out and say they're afraid it's going to fall into the river and say that's why it needs to be replaced. It doesn't have any structural issues. It's functionally obsolete but not structurally deficient.
What about the Cincinnati side? HOT lanes on I-75 would be a good start, and I feel that they should've been included in the ongoing Mill Creek Expressway project.
If KY does not want the tolls, OH should be willing to pick up the tab, especially since they still have the Turnpike on the other side of the state.
Ohio isn't required to pick up the tab. None of the Ohio River is part of Ohio, so ODOT isn't going to take the lead on any Ohio River project.
Quote from: bandit957 on January 07, 2020, 11:44:23 AM
At least tolls would work out better than a sales tax increase, especially since it was only the "anti-tax" crowd that supported the tax increase.
Road funding is dedicated. Sales tax revenues go into the General Fund, not the Road Fund.
As for Ohio's share of the cost, here's is how it breaks down on the lastest TRAC funding list (under tier III, and mostly ununded thus far)
I-71/I-75 Bridge PE - $19.6M
Approach work in Ohio - $1.061B
Ohio share of main span - $117.6M
So the state can't even claim the namesake river as its own? That's strange!
Quote from: Henry on January 08, 2020, 12:34:10 PM
So the state can't even claim the namesake river as its own? That's strange!
Kentucky inherited Virginia's Ohio River border when the Commonweath was made a state.
The Northwest Ordinance confirmed that Virginia and then Kentucky go the river inside their border.
Quote from: bandit957 on January 07, 2020, 11:44:23 AM
At least tolls would work out better than a sales tax increase, especially since it was only the "anti-tax" crowd that supported the tax increase.
The "anti-tax" crowd seldom argues against sales taxes since sales taxes are regressive.
Quote from: GreenLanternCorps on January 08, 2020, 12:50:48 PM
Quote from: Henry on January 08, 2020, 12:34:10 PM
So the state can't even claim the namesake river as its own? That's strange!
Kentucky inherited Virginia's Ohio River border when the Commonweath was made a state.
The Northwest Ordinance confirmed that Virginia and then Kentucky go the river inside their border.
In 1980, the Supreme Court determined that the border should be the low water mark of the river as it had been in 1792 (when Kentucky became a state). It took until 1982 to determine just where that was. In the area of Cincinnati, the border is closer to the northern shoreline, which means Kentucky owns most of the river, but in other parts, the state line is as much as 500 feet off the north shoreline.
https://www.rcnky.com/articles/2017/11/17/marker-celebrates-ohio-kentucky-border-issue-decided-us-supreme-court
Some pretend news on Brent Spence from Cincy:
https://www.wcpo.com/news/transportation-development/move-up-cincinnati/talks-about-brent-spence-bridge-replacement-temporarily-on-hold-while-states-handle-covid-19
(Pretend as in the article states nothing is going on and nothing has been decided. Just add COVID-19 to make news)
Fiery semi-truck crash yesterday could close Brent Spence Bridge for up to 90 days (according to a radio address by Gov. DeWine):
https://www.wlwt.com/article/brent-spence-bridge-could-be-closed-for-more-than-a-month-following-fiery-crash/34660147 (https://www.wlwt.com/article/brent-spence-bridge-could-be-closed-for-more-than-a-month-following-fiery-crash/34660147)
Will certainly be interesting to see what the status of the bridge is for future long term use, since it is still slated to continue carrying a significant portion of the traffic after the proposed new bridge is built directly next to it.
If the current span has to be scrapped, then the plans for the whole project would have to be changed significantly and would become even more expensive.
Quote from: Buck87 on November 13, 2020, 08:33:50 PM
Will certainly be interesting to see what the status of the bridge is for future long term use, since it is still slated to continue carrying a significant portion of the traffic after the proposed new bridge is built directly next to it.
If the current span has to be scrapped, then the plans for the whole project would have to be changed significantly and would become even more expensive.
We'll find out soon enough. Apparently they saw something they didn't like – enough to close the river to all marine traffic.
Quote from: JMoses24 on November 13, 2020, 11:20:39 PM
Quote from: Buck87 on November 13, 2020, 08:33:50 PM
Will certainly be interesting to see what the status of the bridge is for future long term use, since it is still slated to continue carrying a significant portion of the traffic after the proposed new bridge is built directly next to it.
If the current span has to be scrapped, then the plans for the whole project would have to be changed significantly and would become even more expensive.
We'll find out soon enough. Apparently they saw something they didn't like – enough to close the river to all marine traffic.
They did say that in addition to the bridge decks on both levels, a few steel members would have to be replaced as well, but the main structural elements were largely undamaged by the fire.
More photos and history can be found at http://bridgestunnels.com/location/brent-spence-bridge/
(https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/130516161_4700136390058986_5881500565139775530_o.jpg?_nc_cat=106&ccb=2&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=D9diTNuYym8AX-bwP6P&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-1.xx&oh=63343971a053d3156ea483b1ded24cb2&oe=5FF326CF)
(https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/130521055_4700136386725653_1216107233708474562_o.jpg?_nc_cat=100&ccb=2&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=nj0ataf5_ggAX8UPJko&_nc_oc=AQljBy0khvk0sgP3_tCJ1MH7PsIfulO0paF0WxBGTKf4eE_nEeaCO1w3i6ZFIcQFNiQ&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-1.xx&oh=eb70dabfb623630bd1f1a126d31c4495&oe=5FF2DAF9)
(https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/130508773_4700136393392319_6630776718055266817_o.jpg?_nc_cat=109&ccb=2&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=EhuE8x2tc6QAX-3Qsav&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-1.xx&oh=3bbb25cddc1a64185b9fcbe54405a370&oe=5FF34439)
(https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/130471339_4700136546725637_4210892197145509275_o.jpg?_nc_cat=110&ccb=2&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=01TpYCz9mtkAX_x59Mw&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-1.xx&oh=89fe19c88c57cda9199f0c464dd73b90&oe=5FF1EAAE)
(https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/130556093_4700136590058966_4168489768304511599_o.jpg?_nc_cat=103&ccb=2&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=xkgnqMDWKxIAX_rAS1_&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-1.xx&oh=2cc522f673ed938f4850c1ee525fe9f5&oe=5FF368D5)
(https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/130601279_4700136586725633_4856938376322446522_o.jpg?_nc_cat=109&ccb=2&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=QglgzKxLEzYAX8sXg0n&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-1.xx&oh=d35cdabb36e6cb5d3995d295cf6a360e&oe=5FF3F79D)
(https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/130718511_4700136660058959_8865955521849765692_o.jpg?_nc_cat=111&ccb=2&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=S2zYVzX7YZ4AX-j8cVe&_nc_oc=AQnP9PXAF3udUjal6KCaql1mRJT5-JE85Zipyh2-XaNSvzDgKviZKYR1ojf7wByUw7w&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-1.xx&oh=84b703add90084ccf2541e968f5b91e9&oe=5FF2D697)
(https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/130557799_4700136713392287_5365291056477589407_o.jpg?_nc_cat=103&ccb=2&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=3lexjuHMJoIAX9pYBkD&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-1.xx&oh=cb4f8d998eaf3ae45406783cbcd28c27&oe=5FF398BE)
(https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/130491458_4700136753392283_2343238775015565470_o.jpg?_nc_cat=110&ccb=2&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=m2kgqWVax2QAX9WooMp&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-1.xx&oh=b908c7bcc820d41850513fb83c285ece&oe=5FF5948D)
(https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/130559278_4700136790058946_4451236821218579483_o.jpg?_nc_cat=102&ccb=2&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=U7RS-36RCCMAX_kGYB0&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-1.xx&oh=ff2b13ec4a4f7e16d2be7e707383334a&oe=5FF2067F)
(https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/130682465_4700136850058940_8171901292460603902_o.jpg?_nc_cat=103&ccb=2&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=R6j-vMycEQwAX87hKt8&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-1.xx&oh=f066f38596a2c0c77547a0e913becfc4&oe=5FF24114)
(https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/130461132_4700136933392265_7004413106052453059_o.jpg?_nc_cat=108&ccb=2&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=w7kssLSGn_0AX_OKzDg&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-1.xx&oh=28d978c3b77724fdf189558b3c0e3b48&oe=5FF22B28)
(https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/130287284_4700136963392262_5700163128865861905_o.jpg?_nc_cat=108&ccb=2&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=aagHPqENKwkAX_XJXir&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-1.xx&oh=c6b1fff4f9916c5cbabdf35fa98adf13&oe=5FF57699)
(https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/130460053_4700137043392254_23130147567631212_o.jpg?_nc_cat=111&ccb=2&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=Cz7ul8WR2FAAX-pCU0R&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-1.xx&oh=c207ba974b0a1bd5f63159de1af3efd9&oe=5FF4D19A)
^ Pity the bridge can't be repainted while closed.
Man that bridge needs a paint job!
During the Ohio River Bridges Project in Louisville, the JFK Bridge received a paint job and completely new deck shortly after the Abraham Lincoln Bridge opened up. I'm guessing that if they ever build a new bridge, they'll find a way to shift all traffic to it long enough for a similar full rehab to the Brent Spence Bridge.
Also, I wonder if anyone knows who would be the most likely candidate to have the new bridge named for?
Pete Rose ;)
Quote from: seicer on December 08, 2020, 01:57:18 PM
Pete Rose ;)
So, that's what we're gonna do today? We're gonna fight? :-D
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on December 08, 2020, 06:32:52 PM
Quote from: seicer on December 08, 2020, 01:57:18 PM
Pete Rose ;)
So, that's what we're gonna do today? We're gonna fight? :-D
No argument from me on naming it for Charlie Hustle. Or perhaps name it the Rose-Larkin bridge after a couple of home-grown Reds players.
Quote from: edwaleni on December 08, 2020, 12:01:16 PM
Man that bridge needs a paint job!
I think I read that painting is scheduled for next year or the year after.
Quote from: seicer on December 08, 2020, 01:57:18 PM
Pete Rose ;)
Lyrtle the turtle, errr, Mitch McConnell.
Paint the bridge red and simply call it "The Big Red machine"
Scheduled for painting and other unspecified repairs in 2021-22 at the cost of $30 million.
Johnny Bench?
Quote from: Big John on December 10, 2020, 01:39:39 PM
Johnny Bench?
He was from Oklahoma. Rose (and Larkin) are Cincinnati natives.
How about Mike Brown?
:)
Since Kentucky is the lead agency for the bridge, they will paint it UK blue and name it after Adolph Rupp.
Or they could name it after the most famous QB to ever play UK football. George Blanda.
2021-22 for painting and repairs at the cost of $30 million.
Even though he wasn't the greatest politician, it would probably make the most sense to name it after Jim Bunning. After all, he was a Red and he represented KY in the House and Senate.
I have a little bridge
I named it after Clay
And when they reconstruct it
I'll drive on it all day
(Wikipedia doesn't have an article named Clay Bridge or Henry Clay Bridge. I don't know whether there is no bridge with that name or the bridge with that name is just not important enough for its own article. I don't recommend using clay as a material, though.)
Andy Beshear Bridge: has problems with shearing?
Well there is the Clay Wade Bailey Bridge that's just east of the Brent Spence Bridge.
The Clay Wade Bailey Bridge. that's the one that's been getting loaded with all the traffic since the Brent Spence Bridge has been closed. West of I-75 though there is no crossing other than a ferry crossing until you get to I-275. I wonder if the ferry has gotten any busier since the Brent Spence Bridge has been closed. it's used sometimes as a shortcut to get from Western Cincinnati to the airport in northern Kentucky.
Since there is so much controversy about replacing or twinning the bridge, maybe they should name it after Cincy's former mayor, Jerry Springer.
Yes, THAT Jerry Springer.
Quote from: 1 on December 12, 2020, 08:23:46 AM
I have a little bridge
I named it after Clay
And when they reconstruct it
I'll drive on it all day
(Wikipedia doesn't have an article named Clay Bridge or Henry Clay Bridge. I don't know whether there is no bridge with that name or the bridge with that name is just not important enough for its own article. I don't recommend using clay as a material, though.)
I'm unaware of any bridge or highway named after Henry Clay. I would name the Clays Ferry Bridge on I-75 after both Henry Clay and Cassius Clay. Henry was from Lexington, and Cassius' estate was at White Hall in Madison County. The Clays Ferry Bridge connects both of their home counties.
QuoteAndy Beshear Bridge: has problems with shearing?
His dad, former Gov. Steve Beshear, is from Dawson Springs. Unfortunately, the parkways in that area are already named after former governors (Ford and Breathitt) so Andy can't rename one of them for his dad. Of course, he could do like Paul Patton did to Daniel Boone, and rename the Audubon Parkway after Steve Beshear.
How about the Woody Hayes Bridge (named for the greatest Ohio State coach)?
What a freaking joke this is. Just went by this today and the repairs are causing huge traffic backups.
Is it gonna take another I-35W style situation to get funding to replace the bridge?
What joke? That the work is proceeding as quick as humanly possible? That they had to inspect the bridge, remove the damaged sections, order steel, install it, and pour concrete?
It's not being replaced any time soon. It was never planned to be replaced. It's in good structural condition and will remain functional for many more decades. The Brent Spence Bridge project was to evaluate the need for a second, supplemental crossing. That's it.
Quote from: wriddle082 on December 11, 2020, 10:02:29 PM
Even though he wasn't the greatest politician, it would probably make the most sense to name it after Jim Bunning. After all, he was a Red and he represented KY in the House and Senate.
When was Jim Bunning ever a Red? He played for the Tigers, Phillies (twice), Pirates and Dodgers.
Quote from: I-39 on December 18, 2020, 11:02:04 PM
What a freaking joke this is. Just went by this today and the repairs are causing huge traffic backups.
Is it gonna take another I-35W style situation to get funding to replace the bridge?
No kidding the Brent Spence Bridge being closed is causing huge traffic backups. What do you expect? Cincinnati traffic is no joke. They are working on the bridge and trying to finish it as quickly as possible. The Brent Spence Bridge isn't going to be replaced anytime soon and even when the bridge is open the traffic is still a problem.
Quote from: seicer on December 18, 2020, 11:20:34 PM
What joke? That the work is proceeding as quick as humanly possible? That they had to inspect the bridge, remove the damaged sections, order steel, install it, and pour concrete?
It's not being replaced any time soon. It was never planned to be replaced. It's in good structural condition and will remain functional for many more decades. The Brent Spence Bridge project was to evaluate the need for a second, supplemental crossing. That's it.
Which is needed. The Brent Spence Bridge is over capacity as it is now so that would call for a second span being needed. It was really obsolete when they added the extra lane to both decks of the bridge without widening anything which couldn't be done on a bridge anyway unless the bridge was replaced. It's my single most hated stretch of I-75.
Quote from: Flint1979 on December 19, 2020, 04:41:20 AM
Quote from: seicer on December 18, 2020, 11:20:34 PM
What joke? That the work is proceeding as quick as humanly possible? That they had to inspect the bridge, remove the damaged sections, order steel, install it, and pour concrete?
It's not being replaced any time soon. It was never planned to be replaced. It's in good structural condition and will remain functional for many more decades. The Brent Spence Bridge project was to evaluate the need for a second, supplemental crossing. That's it.
Which is needed. The Brent Spence Bridge is over capacity as it is now so that would call for a second span being needed. It was really obsolete when they added the extra lane to both decks of the bridge without widening anything which couldn't be done on a bridge anyway unless the bridge was replaced. It's my single most hated stretch of I-75.
No kidding. Scariest jam I ever encountered was on I-275. Came around the bend to a wall of stopped traffic. Have no idea how there wasn't at least some slowdown prior to it.
Quote from: Rothman on December 19, 2020, 12:30:12 PM
Quote from: Flint1979 on December 19, 2020, 04:41:20 AM
Quote from: seicer on December 18, 2020, 11:20:34 PM
What joke? That the work is proceeding as quick as humanly possible? That they had to inspect the bridge, remove the damaged sections, order steel, install it, and pour concrete?
It's not being replaced any time soon. It was never planned to be replaced. It's in good structural condition and will remain functional for many more decades. The Brent Spence Bridge project was to evaluate the need for a second, supplemental crossing. That's it.
Which is needed. The Brent Spence Bridge is over capacity as it is now so that would call for a second span being needed. It was really obsolete when they added the extra lane to both decks of the bridge without widening anything which couldn't be done on a bridge anyway unless the bridge was replaced. It's my single most hated stretch of I-75.
No kidding. Scariest jam I ever encountered was on I-275. Came around the bend to a wall of stopped traffic. Have no idea how there wasn't at least some slowdown prior to it.
The worst is coming down the hill around the curve on the Kentucky side going Ohio bound. Going Kentucky bound, that curve by Western and Gest is bad but the interchange with I-71 is a joke as well. The Interstate highway system clearly wasn't for Cincinnati, it's a bad setup.
I guess it should be asked but why was I-275 built as far west as it was? Back when the highway was built you can't possibly tell me that it was impossible to route the highway south at it's eastern interchange with I-74 and cross the river and connect to the southern side of I-275 near the airport.
I have always wondered why it goes into Indiana
Quote from: Flint1979 on December 19, 2020, 01:01:42 PM
I guess it should be asked but why was I-275 built as far west as it was? Back when the highway was built you can't possibly tell me that it was impossible to route the highway south at it's eastern interchange with I-74 and cross the river and connect to the southern side of I-275 near the airport.
I have always wondered why it goes into Indiana
This is what I found about it on interstate guide; to include Lawrenceburg near the beltway:
QuoteThe course of I-275 through Boone County, Kentucky was selected based upon a desire to include Indiana in the planning for a Greater Cincinnati circle freeway. The idea for a new bridge spanning the Ohio River from Boone County dated back to the early 1950s with support of Boone County Judge Carroll Cropper and U.S. Representative Earl Wilson of Indiana. A bill was introduced by Rep. Wilson in April 1956 for the establishment of the Lawrenceburg Bridge Company. It involved financing construction of a new span with a bond issue and paying bonds off with tolls. The bill passed, but with 1958 cost estimates of $10 million for the bridge, progress crawled.
The Brent Spence Bridge is in good condition structurally. I hear all these alarmist comments about it falling into the river, but that's not going to happen. It's functionally obsolete because it carries more traffic than it's meant to. It's not structurally deficient by any means.
Unless there's an event (a Reds game) I've never noted terrible traffic around the river. The worst problems I've encountered are just south of the Kentucky I-275 interchange, which are exacerbated by the weave required if you're going from eastbound 275 to southbound 71/75 because of the KY 236 exit; and north of the Norwood Lateral around Paddock Road. I got hung up in that going north years ago and swore never to drive through Cincinnati again during that time of day. I'll cross the river at Maysville and take US 68 and OH 73 through Wilmington before I'll deal with that mess around Paddock.
Quote from: hbelkins on December 19, 2020, 08:23:27 PM
The Brent Spence Bridge is in good condition structurally. I hear all these alarmist comments about it falling into the river, but that's not going to happen. It's functionally obsolete because it carries more traffic than it's meant to. It's not structurally deficient by any means.
Unless there's an event (a Reds game) I've never noted terrible traffic around the river. The worst problems I've encountered are just south of the Kentucky I-275 interchange, which are exacerbated by the weave required if you're going from eastbound 275 to southbound 71/75 because of the KY 236 exit; and north of the Norwood Lateral around Paddock Road. I got hung up in that going north years ago and swore never to drive through Cincinnati again during that time of day. I'll cross the river at Maysville and take US 68 and OH 73 through Wilmington before I'll deal with that mess around Paddock.
I've experienced terrible traffic conditions on the Cincinnati side of the river even without a Bengals or Reds game going on. Every time I go down there it seems like it takes 20-30 minutes longer to get through Cincinnati than it should. I stopped in Wilmington when I was down there a couple weeks ago, seemed like a nice area and I remember some construction being done on the Hampton Inn there. Not a bad area and the traffic is light.
Having lived in Cincinnati, traffic on interstates is exaggerated by:
- A bypass that's too long. Unless it is utterly congested through Cincinnati, it's faster to just take Interstate 71 and 75 than Interstate 275.
- There are major industries and rail yards within the beltway that need to be served by trucks on both interstates. A beltway doesn't serve that.
- The population core is within the beltway. There is some population on the outskirts, but it's mostly concentrated either north of the beltway along Interstate 71 and 75, or OH Route 32.
Quote from: Flint1979 on December 19, 2020, 04:41:20 AM
It's my single most hated stretch of I-75.
<Atlanta is disappointed>
Quote from: triplemultiplex on December 21, 2020, 10:26:32 AM
Quote from: Flint1979 on December 19, 2020, 04:41:20 AM
It's my single most hated stretch of I-75.
<Atlanta is disappointed>
Well they shouldn't be because the I-75/85 concurrency is my second most hated stretch of I-75.
I was just listening to WLW and heard the traffic jam of all traffic jams just reported. I-71/75 northbound is backed up from I-275 to the split in Walton.
Quote from: Flint1979 on December 21, 2020, 05:29:02 PM
I was just listening to WLW and heard the traffic jam of all traffic jams just reported. I-71/75 northbound is backed up from I-275 to the split in Walton.
And the ramp from I-275 Inner/West and from I-275 Outer/East in KY to I-71/75 South is closed for a crash. Not good when those are the primary detour routes for the closed bridge
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 21, 2020, 05:47:05 PM
Quote from: Flint1979 on December 21, 2020, 05:29:02 PM
I was just listening to WLW and heard the traffic jam of all traffic jams just reported. I-71/75 northbound is backed up from I-275 to the split in Walton.
And the ramp from I-275 Inner/West and from I-275 Outer/East in KY to I-71/75 South is closed for a crash. Not good when those are the primary detour routes for the closed bridge
Not good at all. Right now all ramps going from I-275 to I-71/75 except for going to NB I-71/75 are closed. I've looked on Google Maps a few times since I heard it on WLW over an hour ago. That's about a 12 mile backup and it looks like Google Maps is routing everyone to go to KY-16 to get around it.
I work in Hebron (a couple miles west of the airport) and live in Cincinnati. At 9:15 they had the ramp from 275 east to 71/75 north blocked as well. I ended up detouring via Turkeyfoot to Dixie to Buttermilk. Things finally reopened about an hour ago.
Quote from: Oldiesmann on December 21, 2020, 11:30:23 PM
I work in Hebron (a couple miles west of the airport) and live in Cincinnati. At 9:15 they had the ramp from 275 east to 71/75 north blocked as well. I ended up detouring via Turkeyfoot to Dixie to Buttermilk. Things finally reopened about an hour ago.
That ramp had been blocked when I last posted here. It was the westbound I-275 to northbound I-71/75 ramp that was the only one open at that time.
Welcome to Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky!!!
Some of the traffic could be alleviated in a couple of days when the Brent Spence is scheduled to open--maybe. Then it can go back to being the 2nd busiest bridge crossing in the US behind the George Washington Bridge.
This area does need an additional bridge crossing.
Looks like the bridge is scheduled to reopen tomorrow. Currently I-71/75 is closed northbound north of I-275 in Kentucky once again and there is a 3 mile backup leading into that interchange.
The bridge reopened today at approximately 2:45pm eastern.
Quote from: amroad17 on December 22, 2020, 05:07:47 AM
2nd busiest bridge crossing in the US behind the George Washington Bridge.
Is that true? If so, that's surprising. I'd assume something like the Bay Bridge out in Cali or one of the other NYC bridges would be #2.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on December 22, 2020, 05:15:50 PM
Quote from: amroad17 on December 22, 2020, 05:07:47 AM
2nd busiest bridge crossing in the US behind the George Washington Bridge.
Is that true? If so, that's surprising. I'd assume something like the Bay Bridge out in Cali or one of the other NYC bridges would be #2.
Yeah, that seems hard to believe.
Quote from: CardInLex on December 22, 2020, 03:45:07 PM
The bridge reopened today at approximately 2:45pm eastern.
That is good to hear!
Quote from: Rothman on December 22, 2020, 05:25:04 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on December 22, 2020, 05:15:50 PM
Quote from: amroad17 on December 22, 2020, 05:07:47 AM
2nd busiest bridge crossing in the US behind the George Washington Bridge.
Is that true? If so, that's surprising. I'd assume something like the Bay Bridge out in Cali or one of the other NYC bridges would be #2.
Yeah, that seems hard to believe.
Several of the articles reporting on the reopening mention an ADT estimate of 160,000-180,000. I believe both the SFO-Oakland Bay Bridge and Verrazzano-Narrows Bridge are >200,000, so that would put the Brent Spence out of 2nd place right there.
(And locally for me, the 2 Potomac River crossings on the Capital Beltway both punch close to 250,000 based off MDOT SHA's online traffic count data.)
Quote from: jmacswimmer on December 22, 2020, 05:49:14 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 22, 2020, 05:25:04 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on December 22, 2020, 05:15:50 PM
Quote from: amroad17 on December 22, 2020, 05:07:47 AM
2nd busiest bridge crossing in the US behind the George Washington Bridge.
Is that true? If so, that's surprising. I'd assume something like the Bay Bridge out in Cali or one of the other NYC bridges would be #2.
Yeah, that seems hard to believe.
Several of the articles reporting on the reopening mention an ADT estimate of 160,000-180,000. I believe both the SFO-Oakland Bay Bridge and Verrazzano-Narrows Bridge are >200,000, so that would put the Brent Spence out of 2nd place right there.
(And locally for me, the 2 Potomac River crossings on the Capital Beltway both punch close to 250,000 based off MDOT SHA's online traffic count data.)
It may not be the 2nd busiest in the country, but it is still an incredibly busy crossing due to carrying two interstates. In retrospect it might have been better to have 71 and 75 cross the Ohio separately, but given the hilly terrain that might have been difficult.
Quote from: GreenLanternCorps on December 23, 2020, 03:31:56 PM
It may not be the 2nd busiest in the country, but it is still an incredibly busy crossing due to carrying two interstates. In retrospect it might have been better to have 71 and 75 cross the Ohio separately, but given the hilly terrain that might have been difficult.
Just move 471 from between 71 and 275 to between 71 and 75, and move 71 onto what is now 471 and then 275 back to 75
Then 71 and 75 would cross on different bridges. Not that complicated, with roadways and bridges already there
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 23, 2020, 03:35:53 PM
Quote from: GreenLanternCorps on December 23, 2020, 03:31:56 PM
It may not be the 2nd busiest in the country, but it is still an incredibly busy crossing due to carrying two interstates. In retrospect it might have been better to have 71 and 75 cross the Ohio separately, but given the hilly terrain that might have been difficult.
Just move 471 from between 71 and 275 to between 71 and 75, and move 71 onto what is now 471 and then 275 back to 75
Then 71 and 75 would cross on different bridges. Not that complicated, with roadways and bridges already there
I don't see the point.
Quote from: Rothman on December 23, 2020, 07:13:02 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 23, 2020, 03:35:53 PM
Quote from: GreenLanternCorps on December 23, 2020, 03:31:56 PM
It may not be the 2nd busiest in the country, but it is still an incredibly busy crossing due to carrying two interstates. In retrospect it might have been better to have 71 and 75 cross the Ohio separately, but given the hilly terrain that might have been difficult.
Just move 471 from between 71 and 275 to between 71 and 75, and move 71 onto what is now 471 and then 275 back to 75
Then 71 and 75 would cross on different bridges. Not that complicated, with roadways and bridges already there
I don't see the point.
I don't either
The only objective it achieves is 71 and 75 crossing the Ohio on separate bridges, which is what the post I replied to specifically called for
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 23, 2020, 07:48:58 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 23, 2020, 07:13:02 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 23, 2020, 03:35:53 PM
Quote from: GreenLanternCorps on December 23, 2020, 03:31:56 PM
It may not be the 2nd busiest in the country, but it is still an incredibly busy crossing due to carrying two interstates. In retrospect it might have been better to have 71 and 75 cross the Ohio separately, but given the hilly terrain that might have been difficult.
Just move 471 from between 71 and 275 to between 71 and 75, and move 71 onto what is now 471 and then 275 back to 75
Then 71 and 75 would cross on different bridges. Not that complicated, with roadways and bridges already there
I don't see the point.
I don't either
The only objective it achieves is 71 and 75 crossing the Ohio on separate bridges, which is what the post I replied to specifically called for
At that point you might as well just sign I-71 on I-275 all the way around the east side of town and redesignate old 71 as I-671. Less ramps for 71 to take and better continuity.
There was a proposal to construct a new terrain alignment of Interstate 71 between its junction near Walton to Interstate 471, and redesignate Interstate 471 as Interstate 71. That idea passed long ago because of increasing land value costs that now make the project prohibitively expensive.
Quote from: I-55 on December 23, 2020, 08:24:56 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 23, 2020, 07:48:58 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 23, 2020, 07:13:02 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 23, 2020, 03:35:53 PM
Quote from: GreenLanternCorps on December 23, 2020, 03:31:56 PM
It may not be the 2nd busiest in the country, but it is still an incredibly busy crossing due to carrying two interstates. In retrospect it might have been better to have 71 and 75 cross the Ohio separately, but given the hilly terrain that might have been difficult.
Just move 471 from between 71 and 275 to between 71 and 75, and move 71 onto what is now 471 and then 275 back to 75
Then 71 and 75 would cross on different bridges. Not that complicated, with roadways and bridges already there
I don't see the point.
I don't either
The only objective it achieves is 71 and 75 crossing the Ohio on separate bridges, which is what the post I replied to specifically called for
At that point you might as well just sign I-71 on I-275 all the way around the east side of town and redesignate old 71 as I-671. Less ramps for 71 to take and better continuity.
That is such an Indianapolis solution...
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 23, 2020, 08:49:50 PM
Quote from: I-55 on December 23, 2020, 08:24:56 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 23, 2020, 07:48:58 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 23, 2020, 07:13:02 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 23, 2020, 03:35:53 PM
Quote from: GreenLanternCorps on December 23, 2020, 03:31:56 PM
It may not be the 2nd busiest in the country, but it is still an incredibly busy crossing due to carrying two interstates. In retrospect it might have been better to have 71 and 75 cross the Ohio separately, but given the hilly terrain that might have been difficult.
Just move 471 from between 71 and 275 to between 71 and 75, and move 71 onto what is now 471 and then 275 back to 75
Then 71 and 75 would cross on different bridges. Not that complicated, with roadways and bridges already there
I don't see the point.
I don't either
The only objective it achieves is 71 and 75 crossing the Ohio on separate bridges, which is what the post I replied to specifically called for
At that point you might as well just sign I-71 on I-275 all the way around the east side of town and redesignate old 71 as I-671. Less ramps for 71 to take and better continuity.
That is such an Indianapolis solution...
Actually, you can blame it on Washington...
Quote from: Henry on December 23, 2020, 09:02:13 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 23, 2020, 08:49:50 PM
Quote from: I-55 on December 23, 2020, 08:24:56 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 23, 2020, 07:48:58 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 23, 2020, 07:13:02 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on December 23, 2020, 03:35:53 PM
Quote from: GreenLanternCorps on December 23, 2020, 03:31:56 PM
It may not be the 2nd busiest in the country, but it is still an incredibly busy crossing due to carrying two interstates. In retrospect it might have been better to have 71 and 75 cross the Ohio separately, but given the hilly terrain that might have been difficult.
Just move 471 from between 71 and 275 to between 71 and 75, and move 71 onto what is now 471 and then 275 back to 75
Then 71 and 75 would cross on different bridges. Not that complicated, with roadways and bridges already there
I don't see the point.
I don't either
The only objective it achieves is 71 and 75 crossing the Ohio on separate bridges, which is what the post I replied to specifically called for
At that point you might as well just sign I-71 on I-275 all the way around the east side of town and redesignate old 71 as I-671. Less ramps for 71 to take and better continuity.
That is such an Indianapolis solution...
Actually, you can blame it on Washington...
It is pretty effective in Indy though. The only times I have traffic issues in Indy are when INDOT decides to close 5 lanes at once. Other than that, traffic may get thick but it moves nevertheless. Of course, our beltway is structured a little better to act as a bypass route than say, Cincy.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on December 21, 2020, 10:26:32 AM
Quote from: Flint1979 on December 19, 2020, 04:41:20 AM
It's my single most hated stretch of I-75.
<Atlanta is disappointed>
There, there. You'll always be Number 1 to me, Atlanta.
Now that the infrastructure bill has passed, I think it's a good time to resume discussion of this topic.
Will this project now be able to move forward without tolls?
Of the different types and layers of funding provided by the bill, which are most likely to be used or applied for here?
How soon could this thing get started?
Quote from: Buck87 on November 07, 2021, 05:11:42 PM
How soon could this thing get started?
sometime in the 2060s
Ky., Ohio governors jointly request up to $2B for Brent Spence Bridge Corridor Project (https://www.kentucky.com/news/state/kentucky/article258887868.html)
Kentucky and Ohio Govs. Andy Beshear and Mike DeWine announced their plans to jointly request up to $2 billion in federal funding for the Brent Spence Bridge Corridor Project at a press conference in Covington on Monday. Both governors signed a memorandum of understanding confirming the states' intention to work together on the long-discussed bridge project. Signing the memorandum allows transportation officials in both state.
Building a companion bridge over the Ohio river to the west of the Brent Spence Bridge would be the primary objective in the plan if the requested funds are approved. The funding is part of the bipartisan federal infrastructure bill, which includes at least $39 billion for bridge projects.
Article from Construction Equipment Guide with some cool renderings I hadn't seen before. This will be a massive project:
https://www.constructionequipmentguide.com/ohio-kentucky-to-improve-brent-spence-bridge-corridor/56671
I'm really hoping they go with the cable stayed design. The other one looks very similar to the I-471 bridge.
Based on the rendering, it looks like through I-71/75 traffic would use the new bridge while local traffic bound for downtown Cincinnati and Covington would use the existing bridge span.
Another article about this: https://landline.media/ohio-legislature-approves-transportation-plan-brent-spence-bridge-funding/
Quote from: SkyPesos on May 26, 2022, 01:50:26 PM
I'm really hoping they go with the cable stayed design. The other one looks very similar to the I-471 bridge.
The I-471 tied-arch bridge was completed in 1976, a few years before cable-stayed bridges came into wide use in the U.S. It this point a cable-stayed design is more likely to be chosen.
Quote from: codyg1985 on May 26, 2022, 02:14:56 PM
Based on the rendering, it looks like through I-71/75 traffic would use the new bridge while local traffic bound for downtown Cincinnati and Covington would use the existing bridge span.
I had thought that I-71 through traffic in either direction would utilize the Brent Spence while I-75 through traffic in either direction would utilize the new bridge. Essentially the entire 71/75 interchange would be stretched out to exist in both states, with the split/convergence of the two occurring in KY and the SB 71 to NB 75 and SB 75 to NB 71 movements occurring in OH.
Is this no longer the case?
Quote from: wriddle082 on May 28, 2022, 01:59:34 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on May 26, 2022, 02:14:56 PM
Based on the rendering, it looks like through I-71/75 traffic would use the new bridge while local traffic bound for downtown Cincinnati and Covington would use the existing bridge span.
I had thought that I-71 through traffic in either direction would utilize the Brent Spence while I-75 through traffic in either direction would utilize the new bridge. Essentially the entire 71/75 interchange would be stretched out to exist in both states, with the split/convergence of the two occurring in KY and the SB 71 to NB 75 and SB 75 to NB 71 movements occurring in OH.
Is this no longer the case?
And I thought that northbound, the split would occur in Kentucky with I-71 northbound using one deck of the bridge, and I-75 northbound using the other side, and the new bridge would be for all southbound traffic.
Quote from: hbelkins on May 28, 2022, 08:54:08 PM
Quote from: wriddle082 on May 28, 2022, 01:59:34 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on May 26, 2022, 02:14:56 PM
Based on the rendering, it looks like through I-71/75 traffic would use the new bridge while local traffic bound for downtown Cincinnati and Covington would use the existing bridge span.
I had thought that I-71 through traffic in either direction would utilize the Brent Spence while I-75 through traffic in either direction would utilize the new bridge. Essentially the entire 71/75 interchange would be stretched out to exist in both states, with the split/convergence of the two occurring in KY and the SB 71 to NB 75 and SB 75 to NB 71 movements occurring in OH.
Is this no longer the case?
And I thought that northbound, the split would occur in Kentucky with I-71 northbound using one deck of the bridge, and I-75 northbound using the other side, and the new bridge would be for all southbound traffic.
I also thought this or a similar sort of setup is what it was going to be. I guess that changed. To me, shifting the I-71/75 split across the bridges makes more sense.
Update:
QuoteThe companion for the Brent Spence Bridge won't be as big as originally planned. The Kentucky Transportation Cabinet released new configurations for the project, shuttling all local traffic onto the Brent Spence and keeping all through-traffic on the new span. Engineers say that means the new I-71/75 bridge will only need to be 84-feet wide, instead of the 150 feet designed 10 years ago. The new footprint covers only 14 acres, instead of 25, as originally planned.
The existing bridge will have three northbound and three southbound lanes, plus a four-foot wide and an eight-foot wide shoulder.
The new double-decker bridge will have five lanes in each direction and two 12-foot wide shoulders on each level.
KYTC Secretary Jim Gray says in a statement, "The Brent Spence plays a critical role in the solution being put forward and we are excited that our partners in Covington and other local municipalities in Kentucky have voiced their support for our current plan."
"We felt good about where we were a decade ago because that solution provided additional capacity that reduces congestion and improves travel throughout the corridor," ODOT Director Jack Marchbanks says. "We feel even better about this revision because it dramatically reduces the footprint of the new bridge and completely separates interstate and local traffic."
Nearly all of the property on the Ohio side of the river needed for the project has been acquired. On the Kentucky side, the area has been split into two sections: north and south. KTC says the northern section is still being reviewed, but the southern section has 38 properties impacted by the replacement bridge. The owners have been contacted, according to the statement.
The original plan was estimated to cost $2.8 billion. KYTC has not said if the revision will change that price tag.
Kentucky and Ohio governors Andy Beshear and Mike DeWine have asked the federal government for up to $2 billion for the entire corridor project. The money would likely come from the bipartisan federal infrastructure bill, which allocates $39 billion for bridge projects throughout the country. Both states agreed in a memorandum of understanding in February to contribute matching funding requirements.
The project team is working on a second federal grant application to be submitted by Aug. 9.
The plan calls for a groundbreaking by the fall of 2023.
More than 163,000 vehicles travel across the Brent Spence Bridge every day, according to a 2019 study by the Kentucky Transportation Department.
- https://www.wvxu.org/news/2022-07-15/kentucky-ohio-transportation-departments-reveal-smaller-brent-spence-bridge-companion-plan
Why is there a brand new bridge along i-74 around the quad cities, but here they build an ugly ass monstrosity?
Quote from: TempoNick on July 23, 2022, 09:37:27 PM
Why is there a brand new bridge along i-74 around the quad cities, but here they build an ugly ass monstrosity?
Different DOTs.
Quote from: TempoNick on July 23, 2022, 09:37:27 PM
Why is there a brand new bridge along i-74 around the quad cities, but here they build an ugly ass monstrosity?
Because Iowa votes first.
Does anybody know what the alignment will be the northern I 71 I 75 split after the bridge? Will SB 71 go over NB 75 like it currently does or will it be a bit different?
Quote from: Georgia Guardrail on August 06, 2022, 06:01:17 PM
Does anybody know what the alignment will be the northern I 71 I 75 split after the bridge? Will SB 71 go over NB 75 like it currently does or will it be a bit different?
Since the new plan has the northbound interstates on the upper level and the southbound interstates on the lower level, I think it's safe to assume that NB I-75 will be above SB I-71.
So did they reduce the number of lanes and shoulders or just the footprint?
Yes, yes and yes. Reply 154 has a link at the bottom. That article includes a link to https://content.govdelivery.com/attachments/OHDOT/2022/07/14/file_attachments/2213441/BSB%20Corridor%20Bridge%20Lane%20Configuration%20071322.pdf . Easier on me to suggest that the curious viatologists read the article and review the linked document themselves.
I see it's flipped where northbound goes over southbound now. Will NB I-71 split off to the right on NB I-75 or will it fly over NB I-75? Do they have a project map design PDF yet?
Quote from: Georgia Guardrail on August 07, 2022, 02:54:50 PM
I see it's flipped where northbound goes over southbound now. Will NB I-71 split off to the right on NB I-75 or will it fly over NB I-75? Do they have a project map design PDF yet?
The NB-over-SB applies to the new bridge only, whereas the existing bridge will keep its current SB-over-NB setup. The local split will obviously take place on the Covington side, with a new flyover ramp for the SB local entrance (new Exit 193, perhaps?), and the two Interstates will still split in Cincinnati, with I-71 NB going to the right from I-75 like it does now. Of course, that can still change, but my gut feeling is that once the new bridge is open to traffic, the local split will take place in Covington instead of Cincinnati.
I am shocked, shocked I say, that there haven't yet been 20 posts discussing what route number should be given to the existing bridge when the interstates are moved over to the new bridge. US-25? US-42? US-127? Business I-71/75 (please no-I hate green I's)?
Editing to add that I just listened to the podcast at https://www.wvxu.org/show/cincinnati-edition/2022-07-25/what-next-brent-spence-bridge-experts, and it appears that the plan involves separating I-75 in Ohio to Express (no interchanges) and Local lanes at about Marshall Ave, and doing similar in Kentucky as far south as Dixie Highway. This would mean that both bridges would have a proper blue/red I-shield. I believe that I-71 in Ohio would remain just one set of lanes (and it appears that Second and 3rd Streets function sort of as local lanes adjacent I-71 anyway). Not being from the area, I had a bit of trouble following along with the mentions of, for example, 4th street, because there's one of those on each side of the river. I won't say listening to the podcast was 25 minutes well spent, but others may find it useful.
An aside: Google Maps in Cincinnati shows "3rd Street" and "Second Street" (not 2nd Street). Are they really labeled that in real life?
Quote from: davewiecking on August 08, 2022, 11:42:10 AM
I am shocked, shocked I say, that there haven't yet been 20 posts discussing what route number should be given to the existing bridge when the interstates are moved over to the new bridge. US-25? US-42? US-127? Business I-71/75 (please no-I hate green I's)?
Probably because not every river crossing needs a route number, and we can leave the rest of the designations across the other bridges alone.
Quote from: davewiecking on August 08, 2022, 11:42:10 AM
I am shocked, shocked I say, that there haven't yet been 20 posts discussing what route number should be given to the existing bridge when the interstates are moved over to the new bridge. US-25? US-42? US-127? Business I-71/75 (please no-I hate green I's)?
Editing to add that I just listened to the podcast at https://www.wvxu.org/show/cincinnati-edition/2022-07-25/what-next-brent-spence-bridge-experts, and it appears that the plan involves separating I-75 in Ohio to Express (no interchanges) and Local lanes at about Marshall Ave, and doing similar in Kentucky as far south as Dixie Highway. This would mean that both bridges would have a proper blue/red I-shield. I believe that I-71 in Ohio would remain just one set of lanes (and it appears that Second and 3rd Streets function sort of as local lanes adjacent I-71 anyway). Not being from the area, I had a bit of trouble following along with the mentions of, for example, 4th street, because there's one of those on each side of the river. I won't say listening to the podcast was 25 minutes well spent, but others may find it useful.
An aside: Google Maps in Cincinnati shows "3rd Street" and "Second Street" (not 2nd Street). Are they really labeled that in real life?
On the BGS's, no.
Third St: https://goo.gl/maps/Z18L1TnTGjyEhux5A
Second St: https://goo.gl/maps/L7rRMKWKbCjaUyWL7
At the intersections, also no.
Third St: https://goo.gl/maps/j4GqsCmbFGyRFQpn9
Second St: https://goo.gl/maps/mVDA47xHfrsvyL3h8
AFAIK, every numbered street in Cincinnati is spelled out both on the BGS's and at each intersection. Covington, on the other hand, uses numbers (e.g.: 5th, 12th) on the BGS's and at intersections.
Found this in the Cut-in-the-Hill thread and decided to add it here:
Quote from: Henry on September 09, 2022, 06:56:16 PM
Quote from: CardInLex on September 09, 2022, 02:31:01 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on September 07, 2022, 09:38:12 PM
Found out yesterday that the new Brent Spence companion bridge project will include improvements all the way south to the Dixie Highway/Kyles Lane interchanges. What's on the table is a system of C/D lanes between those two exits to eliminate weaving on the mainline.
Someone remind me; the presentation I saw yesterday should be placed online before too long and I'll post the link to it once it's available.
Are you talking about this? https://brentspencebridgecorridor.com/wp-content/themes/bsb/docs/alt/RecommendedAlternativeKentucky.pdf
It has been on the BSB website for a while now.
Since that post is also related to the Brent Spence Bridge Replacement thread, someone may as well put it there.
Speaking of which, I took a closer look at the actual bridge, and from the looks of it, two northbound lanes of I-71 will move to the top half of the old bridge, while northbound local access into Downtown Cincinnati will occupy the bottom half. On the new bridge, two southbound lanes on I-71 will merge into three southbound lanes on I-75 on the top section, while three northbound lanes of I-75 shift to the bottom, and rail/bus lanes will most likely take the bottom half of the new bridge as well. While I'm aware that things may change, that's my interpretation of the plans as they are.
Quote from: Henry on September 09, 2022, 07:10:40 PM
Speaking of which, I took a closer look at the actual bridge, and from the looks of it, two northbound lanes of I-71 will move to the top half of the old bridge, while northbound local access into Downtown Cincinnati will occupy the bottom half. On the new bridge, two southbound lanes on I-71 will merge into three southbound lanes on I-75 on the top section, while three northbound lanes of I-75 shift to the bottom, and rail/bus lanes will most likely take the bottom half of the new bridge as well. While I'm aware that things may change, that's my interpretation of the plans as they are.
Not certain, but I think you're looking at the 2012 plan. Check out the document linked in reply #161 above, which shows the updated plan from earlier this summer, and puts only local traffic on the old bridge.
Quote from: davewiecking on September 09, 2022, 09:32:23 PM
Quote from: Henry on September 09, 2022, 07:10:40 PM
Speaking of which, I took a closer look at the actual bridge, and from the looks of it, two northbound lanes of I-71 will move to the top half of the old bridge, while northbound local access into Downtown Cincinnati will occupy the bottom half. On the new bridge, two southbound lanes on I-71 will merge into three southbound lanes on I-75 on the top section, while three northbound lanes of I-75 shift to the bottom, and rail/bus lanes will most likely take the bottom half of the new bridge as well. While I'm aware that things may change, that's my interpretation of the plans as they are.
Not certain, but I think you're looking at the 2012 plan. Check out the document linked in reply #161 above, which shows the updated plan from earlier this summer, and puts only local traffic on the old bridge.
Yes, the old bridge will revert to three lanes in each direction and will be for local traffic. The new bridge will also be a double-decker, with the style of bridge yet to be determined (a cable-stayed bridge is one of the finalists), and I think there will be five lanes in each direction. The 71-75 split will be maintained in Ohio instead of one of the splits/mergers moving to Kentucky.
Quote from: hbelkins on September 09, 2022, 10:10:41 PM
Yes, the old bridge will revert to three lanes in each direction and will be for local traffic. The new bridge will also be a double-decker, with the style of bridge yet to be determined (a cable-stayed bridge is one of the finalists), and I think there will be five lanes in each direction. The 71-75 split will be maintained in Ohio instead of one of the splits/mergers moving to Kentucky.
What does that mean? Is I-71/75 going to be divided into local and express lanes or is this going to be separated from the Interstate and considered a local road?
Quote from: TempoNick on October 06, 2022, 01:12:26 AM
Quote from: hbelkins on September 09, 2022, 10:10:41 PM
Yes, the old bridge will revert to three lanes in each direction and will be for local traffic. The new bridge will also be a double-decker, with the style of bridge yet to be determined (a cable-stayed bridge is one of the finalists), and I think there will be five lanes in each direction. The 71-75 split will be maintained in Ohio instead of one of the splits/mergers moving to Kentucky.
What does that mean? Is I-71/75 going to be divided into local and express lanes or is this going to be separated from the Interstate and considered a local road?
I think the old bridge will be considered "ramps" between 71/75 in Kentucky and downtown Cincinnati.
$1.6 Billion has been secured for the Brent Spence Bridge project...
Roughly $1.6 billion secured for new Brent Spence Bridge constructionQuoteAfter decades of promises and years of negotiations, Brent Spence Bridge corridor improvements have finally been granted funding from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law President Joe Biden signed in 2021.
According to a press release from Governors Andy Beshear and Mike DeWine, the U.S. Department of Transportation has officially awarded $1.635 billion in funding to the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) and the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet (KYTC).
https://www.wcpo.com/news/local-news/roughly-1-6-billion-secured-for-new-brent-spence-bridge-construction (https://www.wcpo.com/news/local-news/roughly-1-6-billion-secured-for-new-brent-spence-bridge-construction)
In the news coverage here, much was made of the bipartisan cooperation between Gov. Beshear (D) of Kentucky, Sens. Portman and McConnell and Gov. Dewine of Ohio (all R) and the Biden administration and Secretary Buttgieg (D).
One of the stories honed in on McConnell and Portman lobbying the feds for the grant.
This is one of my pet peeves about how projects are funded. Instead of Congress allocating a lump sum and then making states beg/jump through hoops/compete for crumbs, why shouldn't the legislative body specify where the money goes?
I'm not a fan of this process. I've said many times before that the representatives out in the field/on the ground have a better grasp on the needs than do bureaucrats in DC.
Quote from: hbelkins on December 29, 2022, 09:22:36 PM
In the news coverage here, much was made of the bipartisan cooperation between Gov. Beshear (D) of Kentucky, Sens. Portman and McConnell and Gov. Dewine of Ohio (all R) and the Biden administration and Secretary Buttgieg (D).
One of the stories honed in on McConnell and Portman lobbying the feds for the grant.
This is one of my pet peeves about how projects are funded. Instead of Congress allocating a lump sum and then making states beg/jump through hoops/compete for crumbs, why shouldn't the legislative body specify where the money goes?
I'm not a fan of this process. I've said many times before that the representatives out in the field/on the ground have a better grasp on the needs than do bureaucrats in DC.
I have heard the recent bills cynically referred to as consultant assistance bills. All the grant applications and short-staffed DOTs mean hiring consultants to apply for the ridiculous programs.
(personal opinion emphasized)
Quote from: hbelkins on December 29, 2022, 09:22:36 PM
This is one of my pet peeves about how projects are funded. Instead of Congress allocating a lump sum and then making states beg/jump through hoops/compete for crumbs, why shouldn't the legislative body specify where the money goes?
There was a time not too long ago when there was this thing called Congressional earmarks (may call this "pork") where a highway, bridge, or some other pet project in a Congressperson's district could be fully funded. Members of Congress used earmarks as part of the horse-trading the get otherwise controversial pieces of legislation over the finish line. About 10 or so years ago, Congress decided to ban earmarks, but they have since brought earmarks back to some extent, not so much for highway and bridge projects, but for so-called "human infrastructure," or more accurately...handouts.
Quote from: abqtraveler on December 30, 2022, 03:20:05 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on December 29, 2022, 09:22:36 PM
This is one of my pet peeves about how projects are funded. Instead of Congress allocating a lump sum and then making states beg/jump through hoops/compete for crumbs, why shouldn't the legislative body specify where the money goes?
There was a time not too long ago when there was this thing called Congressional earmarks (may call this "pork") where a highway, bridge, or some other pet project in a Congressperson's district could be fully funded. Members of Congress used earmarks as part of the horse-trading the get otherwise controversial pieces of legislation over the finish line. About 10 or so years ago, Congress decided to ban earmarks, but they have since brought earmarks back to some extent, not so much for highway and bridge projects, but for so-called "human infrastructure," or more accurately...handouts.
But, we aren't talking about earmarks, but competitive grants that require sponsors to fill out onerous applications to compete. Although competitive grants have been around in one form or another, the recent bills have exploded their number in terms of types of programs.
Quote from: Rothman on December 30, 2022, 03:33:34 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on December 30, 2022, 03:20:05 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on December 29, 2022, 09:22:36 PM
This is one of my pet peeves about how projects are funded. Instead of Congress allocating a lump sum and then making states beg/jump through hoops/compete for crumbs, why shouldn't the legislative body specify where the money goes?
There was a time not too long ago when there was this thing called Congressional earmarks (may call this "pork") where a highway, bridge, or some other pet project in a Congressperson's district could be fully funded. Members of Congress used earmarks as part of the horse-trading the get otherwise controversial pieces of legislation over the finish line. About 10 or so years ago, Congress decided to ban earmarks, but they have since brought earmarks back to some extent, not so much for highway and bridge projects, but for so-called "human infrastructure," or more accurately...handouts.
But, we aren't talking about earmarks, but competitive grants that require sponsors to fill out onerous applications to compete. Although competitive grants have been around in one form or another, the recent bills have exploded their number in terms of types of programs.
My point is that states (and individual projects) didn't have to compete for funding when Congress allowed earmarks for road and bridge projects. It was all a matter of how well your local congressman was at making deals to get the funding included in the appropriations bills. With these competitive grants, I'm not sure how they decide on one project being funded over the next, but from what I've seen with these competitive grants is the decision on funding a project is now placed in the hands of unelected bureaucrats with no input from Congress.
Quote from: abqtraveler on December 30, 2022, 05:50:59 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 30, 2022, 03:33:34 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on December 30, 2022, 03:20:05 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on December 29, 2022, 09:22:36 PM
This is one of my pet peeves about how projects are funded. Instead of Congress allocating a lump sum and then making states beg/jump through hoops/compete for crumbs, why shouldn't the legislative body specify where the money goes?
There was a time not too long ago when there was this thing called Congressional earmarks (may call this "pork") where a highway, bridge, or some other pet project in a Congressperson's district could be fully funded. Members of Congress used earmarks as part of the horse-trading the get otherwise controversial pieces of legislation over the finish line. About 10 or so years ago, Congress decided to ban earmarks, but they have since brought earmarks back to some extent, not so much for highway and bridge projects, but for so-called "human infrastructure," or more accurately...handouts.
But, we aren't talking about earmarks, but competitive grants that require sponsors to fill out onerous applications to compete. Although competitive grants have been around in one form or another, the recent bills have exploded their number in terms of types of programs.
My point is that states (and individual projects) didn't have to compete for funding when Congress allowed earmarks for road and bridge projects. It was all a matter of how well your local congressman was at making deals to get the funding included in the appropriations bills. With these competitive grants, I'm not sure how they decide on one project being funded over the next, but from what I've seen with these competitive grants is the decision on funding a project is now placed in the hands of unelected bureaucrats with no input from Congress.
They do move the selection authority from Congress to the Executive. But, like I said, it's not like earmarks and grants were exclusive. There have been competitive grants available over the entire tenure of my career. The number of them has just grown considerably.
Quote from: Rothman on December 30, 2022, 09:09:03 AM
Quote from: hbelkins on December 29, 2022, 09:22:36 PM
In the news coverage here, much was made of the bipartisan cooperation between Gov. Beshear (D) of Kentucky, Sens. Portman and McConnell and Gov. Dewine of Ohio (all R) and the Biden administration and Secretary Buttgieg (D).
One of the stories honed in on McConnell and Portman lobbying the feds for the grant.
This is one of my pet peeves about how projects are funded. Instead of Congress allocating a lump sum and then making states beg/jump through hoops/compete for crumbs, why shouldn't the legislative body specify where the money goes?
I'm not a fan of this process. I've said many times before that the representatives out in the field/on the ground have a better grasp on the needs than do bureaucrats in DC.
I have heard the recent bills cynically referred to as consultant assistance bills. All the grant applications and short-staffed DOTs mean hiring consultants to apply for the ridiculous programs.
(personal opinion emphasized)
I'm sure Kentucky and Ohio used some engineering firm to help with the application process. They wouldn't have to be short-staffed to do so. It's SOP on most projects, funded through a competitive federal granting process or not.
Here's a typical Kentucky engineering career:
*Student gets KYTC scholarship, which provides them summer employment (and time accrual) in exchange for a commitment to work a handful of years for KYTC.
*Student goes to work for KYTC after graduation, goes through rotations in various departments as an EIT, passes the PE exam, then works for KYTC until they get 20 years service credit, at which time they are eligible for paid health insurance upon retirement.
*Employee retires some time after that 20 years of service credit around the ripe old age of 45, with a nice lifetime pension because the PEs earn high-five-figures/low-six-figures, then sign on with a consulting firm.
*Employee has a full second career with the engineering firm unless said employee gets appointed to a high management politically-appointed position at KYTC such as division director or department commissioner.
Quote from: abqtraveler on December 30, 2022, 05:50:59 PM
My point is that states (and individual projects) didn't have to compete for funding when Congress allowed earmarks for road and bridge projects. It was all a matter of how well your local congressman was at making deals to get the funding included in the appropriations bills. With these competitive grants, I'm not sure how they decide on one project being funded over the next, but from what I've seen with these competitive grants is the decision on funding a project is now placed in the hands of unelected bureaucrats with no input from Congress.
And some of these project may appear to be local, but have much bigger impacts. The BSB is one of them. At first glance it might seem like a Kentucky-Ohio project, but there are definitely other interests in play -- such as those of Toyota, with a big factory adjacent to I-75 not all that far south of the river.
Quote from: hbelkins on December 30, 2022, 10:06:07 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 30, 2022, 09:09:03 AM
Quote from: hbelkins on December 29, 2022, 09:22:36 PM
In the news coverage here, much was made of the bipartisan cooperation between Gov. Beshear (D) of Kentucky, Sens. Portman and McConnell and Gov. Dewine of Ohio (all R) and the Biden administration and Secretary Buttgieg (D).
One of the stories honed in on McConnell and Portman lobbying the feds for the grant.
This is one of my pet peeves about how projects are funded. Instead of Congress allocating a lump sum and then making states beg/jump through hoops/compete for crumbs, why shouldn't the legislative body specify where the money goes?
I'm not a fan of this process. I've said many times before that the representatives out in the field/on the ground have a better grasp on the needs than do bureaucrats in DC.
I have heard the recent bills cynically referred to as consultant assistance bills. All the grant applications and short-staffed DOTs mean hiring consultants to apply for the ridiculous programs.
(personal opinion emphasized)
I'm sure Kentucky and Ohio used some engineering firm to help with the application process. They wouldn't have to be short-staffed to do so. It's SOP on most projects, funded through a competitive federal granting process or not.
Here's a typical Kentucky engineering career:
*Student gets KYTC scholarship, which provides them summer employment (and time accrual) in exchange for a commitment to work a handful of years for KYTC.
*Student goes to work for KYTC after graduation, goes through rotations in various departments as an EIT, passes the PE exam, then works for KYTC until they get 20 years service credit, at which time they are eligible for paid health insurance upon retirement.
*Employee retires some time after that 20 years of service credit around the ripe old age of 45, with a nice lifetime pension because the PEs earn high-five-figures/low-six-figures, then sign on with a consulting firm.
*Employee has a full second career with the engineering firm unless said employee gets appointed to a high management politically-appointed position at KYTC such as division director or department commissioner.
Quote from: abqtraveler on December 30, 2022, 05:50:59 PM
My point is that states (and individual projects) didn't have to compete for funding when Congress allowed earmarks for road and bridge projects. It was all a matter of how well your local congressman was at making deals to get the funding included in the appropriations bills. With these competitive grants, I'm not sure how they decide on one project being funded over the next, but from what I've seen with these competitive grants is the decision on funding a project is now placed in the hands of unelected bureaucrats with no input from Congress.
And some of these project may appear to be local, but have much bigger impacts. The BSB is one of them. At first glance it might seem like a Kentucky-Ohio project, but there are definitely other interests in play -- such as those of Toyota, with a big factory adjacent to I-75 not all that far south of the river.
At NYSDOT, it depends if a consultant has been hired for preliminary design or not, which is correlated with the size/cost of the project. This is typically why you only see very large projects get awarded federal grant funds in NY. For smaller projects, although eligible for some grants, NYSDOT relies upon in-house engineers to get applications in and it's essentially viewed as a risky burden.
(personal opinion emphasized)
I guess this constitutes moving forward:
QuoteKentucky and Ohio have put the call out to firms interested in building one of the nation's most significant infrastructure projects — the Brent Spence Bridge Corridor — just one month after Govs. Andy Beshear of Kentucky and Mike DeWine of Ohio joined bipartisan leaders to celebrate a historic $1.635 billion federal investment to move the project forward.
A request for proposals (RFP) to provide construction and design services on the long-awaited project was released by the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) and the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet (KYTC).
This contract addresses six of the eight miles of the total corridor; five miles of the Interstate Highway 71/75 corridor in Kentucky and one mile of I-75 in Ohio. It includes improvements to the Brent Spence Bridge and the construction of a companion bridge to its west. Work on the two northernmost sections of the corridor in Ohio will be done under separate contracts.
"Just a month ago, we celebrated a historic $1.635 billion in federal grant funding to build the new bridge crossing over the Ohio River and improve the entire Brent Spence Bridge Corridor with no tolls," said Gov. Beshear. "This is a huge step that gets us one step closer to fulfilling the dreams of thousands of travelers by providing traffic relief, increased safety and a boost to our nation's commerce."
- https://www.nkytribune.com/2023/02/kentucky-and-ohio-issue-request-for-proposals-for-construction-design-of-brent-spence-bridge-project/
On track to start construction in November.
(https://linknky.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/ImageHandler-1.jpg)
https://twitter.com/Mark_Paynewrite/status/1628777951931031553?s=20
QuoteTransportation Secretary Jim Gray and Kentucky's Transportation Cabinet's Brent Spence Bridge Project Manager Stacee Hans presented information on the bridge to the House Budget Review Subcommittee on Transportation on Thursday.
It's the first time they have given the legislature an update since they approved $250 million in matching funds during the 2022 legislative session to apply for a federal grant for the project.
"We have a visible path to construction," Gray said, noting the importance of the matching funds.
Since the legislature provided those matching funds, the project secured a $1.6 billion grant from the federal government via the 2021 Infrastructure bill. In January, President Joe Biden visited Covington to tout the funding.
"I truly believe that the local match that we were able to demonstrate in our grant applications was certainly the pivotal and turning point," Hans said.
She noted that the transportation department requested the maximum amount for the grant criteria, which was $1.6 billion, and received $1.38 billion.
- https://linknky.com/kentucky/frankfort/2023/02/23/kentucky-transportation-secretary-gives-brent-spence-update/
RFPs have been put out and they are due March 31st.
QuoteResponses to the RFP are due on March 31, 2023. The schedule calls for the design-build team to be selected in May, allowing for planning to take place immediately and initial construction work to begin before the year's end.
- https://www.constructionequipmentguide.com/states-seek-rfps-to-begin-construction-on-brent-spence-bridge-corridor-project/60186
The city apparently isn't too happy with the proposal and wants ODOT to rethink the design to see if the footprint can be narrowed.
QuoteThe Ohio Department of Transportation should consider more ways to narrow the footprint of the Brent Spence Bridge approach, including the Bridge Forward proposal that seeks to reclaim 30 acres of land in the city's urban core, a resolution passed by Cincinnati City Council says.
Council, which pushed for the resolution, approved it unanimously on May 10, and it included Mayor Aftab Pureval as a co-sponsor. It's a significant move by council to try to shape the once-in-a-generation project.
"We are in a moment where ... we have to think differently," said Councilwoman Meeka Owens. "We are in a moment where we have the opportunity to do these things. It's not about emotions. It's about facts."
The resolution asks the city administration to "explore all options to reclaim additional land throughout the corridor," including reducing the highway's width, "streamline and reduce the footprint of downtown entry/exit points" and "reviewing and considering various innovative concepts submitted to ODOT."
It also asks ODOT specifically report on the cost, feasibility and other considerations of alternative proposals, including Bridge Forward's plan.
Bridge Forward is a group of citizens that hopes to improve the Brent Spence corridor plan by adding developable land back to the West End. The group's overall vision calls for the state to narrow the highway's footprint as it approaches the Brent Spence Bridge and its new, companion bridge by creating two collector roads alongside each side of a trenched Interstate 75. It also alters the spaghetti configurations of roadways over the highway.
- https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2023/05/11/cincinnati-odot-brent-spence-redesign.html
Too late. They've been talking about this for 30 years and now they're complaining?
Well former Mayor Cranley wouldn't have and didn't. Neither would have former councilman Smitherman.
Quote from: GCrites80s on May 12, 2023, 09:58:48 PM
Well former Mayor Cranley wouldn't have and didn't. Neither would have former councilman Smitherman.
What I would love to share over here, is the graph someone made, over on urbanohio, of the actually traffic count for the Brent Spence Bridge (for the last 20 years?) versus all the various projects the various state, region, and city entities have made over the decades as to why a new bridge should be built for the Brent Spence.
Gcrites & Seicer would know of what I'm writing about here.
Then there's the graphs of traffic count projections on the bridge from the last 20 years that were way high vs. what the traffic counts ended up being.
Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on May 13, 2023, 11:33:03 PM
Quote from: GCrites80s on May 12, 2023, 09:58:48 PM
Well former Mayor Cranley wouldn't have and didn't. Neither would have former councilman Smitherman.
What I would love to share over here, is the graph someone made, over on urbanohio, of the actually traffic count for the Brent Spence Bridge (for the last 20 years?) versus all the various projects the various state, region, and city entities have made over the decades as to why a new bridge should be built for the Brent Spence.
Gcrites & Seicer would know of what I'm writing about here.
From https://forum.urbanohio.com/topic/476-cincinnati-brent-spence-bridge/?do=findComment&comment=1092293
(https://forum.urbanohio.com/uploads/monthly_2023_02/image.png.f85f64ff686acf5bf46176de91910869.png)
While I am a proponent of a new Brent Spence Bridge, I am fearing that two bridges will be overkill and will be an enormous waste of taxpayers' dollars to keep both maintained for the next several decades. (The Brent Spence Bridge can remain standing for another century with proper maintenance.) Here are my fears:
- This does not enhance the overall capacity of I-71 or I-75. I-75 is only being widened to four lanes in each direction in Ohio, while I-75 in Kentucky is only gaining a lane up to the Dixie Highway interchange.
- This moves congestion away from the Brent Spence Bridge and Cincinnati to the merge areas in Covington. Covington also loses out on a lot of valuable land. This is a huge loss for this city and no amount of greenwashing both DOTs do can hide those fundamental issues.
- Traffic counts have been stagnant or dropping. The rosy projections that traffic will be crushing it at over 240,000 VPD by ODOT are insane.
- This is a huge loss for Cincinnati. While the proposals by certain groups (that have come way too late in the planning process) show what could be done, the fact is that there are no major development proposals west of downtown in the Queensgate neighborhood. The land that is Queensgate was formerly the Kenyon-Barr neighborhood, essentially an extension of the much-cherished Over-the-Rhine north of downtown. Nearly all of it was removed for I-75 and an industrial park. The footprint could be vastly smaller and I still think here is time for ODOT to button up the right-of-way as it contains way too much green space (that will never be properly maintained) and too many high-speed ramps that don't need to exist in an urban area.
- Going back to traffic counts - while both bridges will not be tolled, will one take the burden off to the point that both bridges will not be needed? Look at what happened to Louisville and it's boondoggles, and while that is the result of high tolls, it's also because of flawed traffic projections.
Quote from: seicer on May 14, 2023, 09:08:44 PM
Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on May 13, 2023, 11:33:03 PM
Quote from: GCrites80s on May 12, 2023, 09:58:48 PM
Well former Mayor Cranley wouldn't have and didn't. Neither would have former councilman Smitherman.
What I would love to share over here, is the graph someone made, over on urbanohio, of the actually traffic count for the Brent Spence Bridge (for the last 20 years?) versus all the various projects the various state, region, and city entities have made over the decades as to why a new bridge should be built for the Brent Spence.
Gcrites & Seicer would know of what I'm writing about here.
From https://forum.urbanohio.com/topic/476-cincinnati-brent-spence-bridge/?do=findComment&comment=1092293
<snip image & commentary>
That is what I was looking for. Thank you, Sherman.
Quote from: seicer on May 14, 2023, 09:08:44 PM
While I am a proponent of a new Brent Spence Bridge, I am fearing that two bridges will be overkill and will be an enormous waste of taxpayers' dollars to keep both maintained for the next several decades. (The Brent Spence Bridge can remain standing for another century with proper maintenance.)
My problem with what they're doing is that they don't just blow it up and completely replace it. If they've got money for a bridge in Davenport Iowa for I-74, they certainly should have one for the second most heavily trafficked highway in the nation, I-75.
Anybody who has driven that bridge regularly knows that it needs to be replaced. It's a bottleneck. It doesn't have any emergency lanes to pull over on. Poor sight lines. People have been killed on that bridge.
This bridge would be fine along some US Route like maybe US 23 or US 33, but it's too compromised to be carrying traffic for two major interstates.
That said, it seems like I-71 could be routed down I-471 And then I-275 to take some of the traffic away from that bridge. (Then you make that connector between the two I-471 I guess if you want to be anal about it. I think it's called Fort Washington Way.) I don't know if that just moves the bottleneck further south, but it seems like it's easier to deal with bottlenecks on land.
Quote from: TempoNick on May 15, 2023, 12:16:05 PM
That said, it seems like I-71 could be routed down I-471 And then I-275 to take some of the traffic away from that bridge. (Then you make that connector between the two I-471 I guess if you want to be anal about it. I think it's called Fort Washington Way.) I don't know if that just moves the bottleneck further south, but it seems like it's easier to deal with bottlenecks on land.
The main issue with routing I-71 along I-275 and I-471 is the fact that the current I-275 EB to I-471 NB ramp (74B) is only one lane. This regularly backs up almost to the Wilder interchange (77) during rush hours. Without improving the ramps, if I-71 was re-routed that way, the backups would probably extend to the Licking River (Poweleit) bridge or maybe the Taylor Mill interchange (79) because of the traffic that exits at the Wilder interchange. One should see the backups on I-275 EB in the afternoon–slow traffic from I-75 all the way to I-471.
A possibility to re-route I-71 would be to move the routing on I-275 around the east side of Cincinnati (co-signed, of course so money could be saved not changing exit numbers). It is only 10 extra miles traveling I-275 around Cincinnati verses traveling I-71 through Cincinnati. I-471 could be routed up current I-71 from the Mt. Adams interchange to I-275 in Sycamore Township. Ft. Washington Way could be I-875.
However, this will not happen. I believe the plan for these bridges is to place I-75 on the new bridge and keep I-71 on the original one after refurbishing–which, according to "seicer" , will put the merge/split in Covington around the Pike/12th Street interchange. The original bridge would be re-striped to three lanes above and below to allow for a shoulder/emergency lane.
No matter what decisions are made, there will be a backup somewhere on I-75/I-71 in Covington or Cincinnati because of the bridge(s). It is the shortest way to go through Cincinnati because I-275 is not much of a bypass as one would have to travel 43 miles west of the city or 41 miles east of the city to go from one I-75 interchange to the other. It is 23 miles taking I-75 through the city. I-275 is probably a good bypass for I-71 traffic as I mentioned above. Basically, I-275 is a commuter loop for Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky residents, and not designed for bypassing a mid-sized city.
Quote from: amroad17 on May 16, 2023, 01:32:33 AM
Quote from: TempoNick on May 15, 2023, 12:16:05 PM
That said, it seems like I-71 could be routed down I-471 And then I-275 to take some of the traffic away from that bridge. (Then you make that connector between the two I-471 I guess if you want to be anal about it. I think it's called Fort Washington Way.) I don't know if that just moves the bottleneck further south, but it seems like it's easier to deal with bottlenecks on land.
The main issue with routing I-71 along I-275 and I-471 is the fact that the current I-275 EB to I-471 NB ramp (74B) is only one lane. This regularly backs up almost to the Wilder interchange (77) during rush hours. Without improving the ramps, if I-71 was re-routed that way, the backups would probably extend to the Licking River (Poweleit) bridge or maybe the Taylor Mill interchange (79) because of the traffic that exits at the Wilder interchange. One should see the backups on I-275 EB in the afternoon–slow traffic from I-75 all the way to I-471.
A possibility to re-route I-71 would be to move the routing on I-275 around the east side of Cincinnati (co-signed, of course so money could be saved not changing exit numbers). It is only 10 extra miles traveling I-275 around Cincinnati verses traveling I-71 through Cincinnati. I-471 could be routed up current I-71 from the Mt. Adams interchange to I-275 in Sycamore Township. Ft. Washington Way could be I-875.
However, this will not happen. I believe the plan for these bridges is to place I-75 on the new bridge and keep I-71 on the original one after refurbishing–which, according to "seicer" , will put the merge/split in Covington around the Pike/12th Street interchange. The original bridge would be re-striped to three lanes above and below to allow for a shoulder/emergency lane.
No matter what decisions are made, there will be a backup somewhere on I-75/I-71 in Covington or Cincinnati because of the bridge(s). It is the shortest way to go through Cincinnati because I-275 is not much of a bypass as one would have to travel 43 miles west of the city or 41 miles east of the city to go from one I-75 interchange to the other. It is 23 miles taking I-75 through the city. I-275 is probably a good bypass for I-71 traffic as I mentioned above. Basically, I-275 is a commuter loop for Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky residents, and not designed for bypassing a mid-sized city.
I'm guessing 275 was not designed as a loop rather than a bypass due to the topography of thr region.
The new bridge will be for interstate traffic only, while the old bridge will be for local traffic: https://brentspencebridgecorridor.com/new-bridge/
Quote from: seicer on May 16, 2023, 09:42:28 AM
The new bridge will be for interstate traffic only, while the old bridge will be for local traffic: https://brentspencebridgecorridor.com/new-bridge/
Shows you how out of touch I am. I thought this weird mix was still the deal:
(https://brentspencebridgecorridor.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/2012-Decision-BSB-1024x574.jpg)
But it's been replaced, as you note, with the more intuitive:
(https://brentspencebridgecorridor.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/2022-Decision-BSB-1024x680.jpg)
Changing the route numbers on the existing highways isn't going to go much to improve congestion, because generally drivers take the most direct route, or take a less direct route to avoid congestion, regardless of the route numbers. Computer navigation won't be affected. Drivers making their own informed decisions by looking at a map won't be affected. The only drivers that would follow the new route would be those who read the freeway signs yet don't look at maps, which IME is a fairly small proportion of drivers.
[/quote]
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on May 16, 2023, 05:00:37 AM
Quote from: amroad17 on May 16, 2023, 01:32:33 AM
Quote from: TempoNick on May 15, 2023, 12:16:05 PM
That said, it seems like I-71 could be routed down I-471 And then I-275 to take some of the traffic away from that bridge. (Then you make that connector between the two I-471 I guess if you want to be anal about it. I think it's called Fort Washington Way.) I don't know if that just moves the bottleneck further south, but it seems like it's easier to deal with bottlenecks on land.
The main issue with routing I-71 along I-275 and I-471 is the fact that the current I-275 EB to I-471 NB ramp (74B) is only one lane. This regularly backs up almost to the Wilder interchange (77) during rush hours. Without improving the ramps, if I-71 was re-routed that way, the backups would probably extend to the Licking River (Poweleit) bridge or maybe the Taylor Mill interchange (79) because of the traffic that exits at the Wilder interchange. One should see the backups on I-275 EB in the afternoon–slow traffic from I-75 all the way to I-471.
A possibility to re-route I-71 would be to move the routing on I-275 around the east side of Cincinnati (co-signed, of course so money could be saved not changing exit numbers). It is only 10 extra miles traveling I-275 around Cincinnati verses traveling I-71 through Cincinnati. I-471 could be routed up current I-71 from the Mt. Adams interchange to I-275 in Sycamore Township. Ft. Washington Way could be I-875.
However, this will not happen. I believe the plan for these bridges is to place I-75 on the new bridge and keep I-71 on the original one after refurbishing–which, according to "seicer" , will put the merge/split in Covington around the Pike/12th Street interchange. The original bridge would be re-striped to three lanes above and below to allow for a shoulder/emergency lane.
No matter what decisions are made, there will be a backup somewhere on I-75/I-71 in Covington or Cincinnati because of the bridge(s). It is the shortest way to go through Cincinnati because I-275 is not much of a bypass as one would have to travel 43 miles west of the city or 41 miles east of the city to go from one I-75 interchange to the other. It is 23 miles taking I-75 through the city. I-275 is probably a good bypass for I-71 traffic as I mentioned above. Basically, I-275 is a commuter loop for Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky residents, and not designed for bypassing a mid-sized city.
I'm guessing 275 was not designed as a loop rather than a bypass due to the topography of thr region.
On the western side of Cincinnati is somewhat the issue. I-275 around the east side of Cincinnati is in the best routing that it currently is as it serves Loveland, Milford, the Beechmont area, and Coney Island. Eastgate came to be because of I-275.
Originally, I-275 was to be built from I-71 in Sycamore Township to I-74 in Whitewater Township (as seen in the 1962 Rand McNally maps). It was decided to build I-275 as a circumferential freeway sometime after this.
I-275 around the west side of Cincinnati had one plan where it would go south around the hill at current Exit 9 of I-74 and cross the Ohio just west of Cleves. It then would have paralleled KY 237 and met current I-275 just west of the Hebron interchange curving east towards the airport. This was deemed "too hilly" and the current routing was selected as it would serve Lawrenceburg, IN. as well as having a "less hilly" drive for motorists.
So, yes, topography had much to do with the decisions made concerning I-275 west of Cincinnati. Great for local commuters, not so great for long-distance drivers wanting to bypass Cincinnati.
Quote from: seicer on May 16, 2023, 09:42:28 AM
The new bridge will be for interstate traffic only, while the old bridge will be for local traffic: https://brentspencebridgecorridor.com/new-bridge/
So there will be more ramps built on the Cincinnati side to accommodate I-71 traffic?
Also, the bridge footprint has been reduced from 172 feet to 107 feet and the Cincinnati city council still wants it reduced more?
Quote from: vtk on May 16, 2023, 02:13:21 PM
Changing the route numbers on the existing highways isn't going to go much to improve congestion, because generally drivers take the most direct route, or take a less direct route to avoid congestion, regardless of the route numbers. Computer navigation won't be affected. Drivers making their own informed decisions by looking at a map won't be affected. The only drivers that would follow the new route would be those who read the freeway signs yet don't look at maps, which IME is a fairly small proportion of drivers.
Totally agree. This is the logic I always used to avoid Chicago or New York City if I did not have to be in those cities.
Quote from: amroad17 on May 16, 2023, 02:21:58 PM
Also, the bridge footprint has been reduced from 172 feet to 107 feet and the Cincinnati city council still wants it reduced more?
The city wants the footprint of the Ohio approach interchange complex to be reduced.
Quote from: vtk on May 16, 2023, 02:28:43 PM
Quote from: amroad17 on May 16, 2023, 02:21:58 PM
Also, the bridge footprint has been reduced from 172 feet to 107 feet and the Cincinnati city council still wants it reduced more?
The city wants the footprint of the Ohio approach interchange complex to be reduced.
OK. When I read that post, I thought they were talking about the bridge.
Quote from: amroad17 on May 16, 2023, 02:21:58 PM
Totally agree. This is the logic I always used to avoid Chicago or New York City if I did not have to be in those cities.
[/quote]
Personally, I'm hesitant to change route numbers, for example, I-74 through Peoria. I know there's a bypass they tell you to use, but I also know that I-74 goes to my destination, so why tempt fate. But I prefer the bypass around the Quad Cities to get to Interstate 80.
Professional drivers and local traffic aren't going to be swayed by a number, that is true. But the casual traveler making a split second decision may very well choose to leave well enough alone.
Switching route numbers in Cincy may have been a great idea ---in the days of paper maps and no GPS nor map apps...
Nowadays, technology has made route switching for EXISTING highways obsolete. It only makes sense if you are building a new highway along a new corridor.
I still keep expecting to see Erin McBride on those videos
What is the bridge replacement supposed to look like ?
Here's one view:
https://brentspencebridgecorridor.com/
A Walsh Construction (https://www.walshgroup.com/) and Kokosing Construction (https://www.kokosing.biz/) joint venture, named the Walsh Kokosing Design-Build Team, has been selected as the design-build contractor for the Brent Spence Bridge corridor project. According to ENR (https://www.enr.com/), it's a $3.1 billion contract award. Both Kokosing and Walsh are Midwest based, with Kokosing located in Westerville, Ohio, and Walsh in Chicago.
Read more about this major contract award here (https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2023/07/27/governors-announce-contracting-team-for-brent-spence-bridge-project/70481033007/), here (https://www.enr.com/articles/56851-walsh-kokosing-jv-wins-31b-ohio-kentucky-bridge-contract), and here (https://www.fox19.com/2023/07/27/beshear-dewine-provide-brent-spence-bridge-corridor-updates/).
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on July 26, 2023, 04:53:23 AM
Here's one view:
https://brentspencebridgecorridor.com/
My only complaint about the design of the bridge is that it looks like a painted version of the I-471 "Big Mac Bridge".
Quote from: ITB on July 27, 2023, 08:50:46 PM
A Walsh Construction (https://www.walshgroup.com/) and Kokosing Construction (https://www.kokosing.biz/) joint venture, named the Walsh Kokosing Design-Build Team, has been selected as the design-build contractor for the Brent Spence Bridge corridor project. According to ENR (https://www.enr.com/), it's a $3.1 billion contract award. Both Kokosing and Walsh are Midwest based, with Kokosing located in Westerville, Ohio, and Walsh in Chicago.
Read more about this major contract award here (https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2023/07/27/governors-announce-contracting-team-for-brent-spence-bridge-project/70481033007/), here (https://www.enr.com/articles/56851-walsh-kokosing-jv-wins-31b-ohio-kentucky-bridge-contract), and here (https://www.fox19.com/2023/07/27/beshear-dewine-provide-brent-spence-bridge-corridor-updates/).
I understand from the Ohio side of things, but I figure Kokosing must have greased a lot of palms in Kentucky to get that job. How does Walsh fit in? Are they some kind of preferred contractor in Kentucky like Kokosing is in Ohio?
Quote from: TempoNick on July 28, 2023, 02:01:38 PM
Quote from: ITB on July 27, 2023, 08:50:46 PM
A Walsh Construction (https://www.walshgroup.com/) and Kokosing Construction (https://www.kokosing.biz/) joint venture, named the Walsh Kokosing Design-Build Team, has been selected as the design-build contractor for the Brent Spence Bridge corridor project. According to ENR (https://www.enr.com/), it's a $3.1 billion contract award. Both Kokosing and Walsh are Midwest based, with Kokosing located in Westerville, Ohio, and Walsh in Chicago.
Read more about this major contract award here (https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2023/07/27/governors-announce-contracting-team-for-brent-spence-bridge-project/70481033007/), here (https://www.enr.com/articles/56851-walsh-kokosing-jv-wins-31b-ohio-kentucky-bridge-contract), and here (https://www.fox19.com/2023/07/27/beshear-dewine-provide-brent-spence-bridge-corridor-updates/).
I understand from the Ohio side of things, but I figure Kokosing must have greased a lot of palms in Kentucky to get that job. How does Walsh fit in? Are they some kind of preferred contractor in Kentucky like Kokosing is in Ohio?
Both Walsh and Kokosing are major contractors who have expertise and experience to tackle a major project like the Brent Spence Bridge Project. Neither company is a preferred contractor for a particular state or area. First and foremost is the ability to do the contracted job. And with the Brent Spence Bridge Project, the number of companies that can "do" the job, build that bridge, is not particularly large. Far from it. There's probably only 20 to 30 companies nationwide that have the ability to take on such a large project.
Because the Spence Bridge Project is such a major undertaking, Walsh and Kokosing decided to team up to form a joint venture. It's a plus Kokosing is located in Ohio, but if they had been headquartered in Tennessee or Kentucky, it would have made no difference in the contract award. Again, it's the expertise and experience of Walsh and Kokosing that led to the contract award. Typically, way before a contract is awarded, there's a step in the process called the RFQ (Request for Qualifications) in which companies have to put forward documentation to prove they have the ability to do the job. After that, often there's the RFP (Request for Proposals), where companies put forward how the intend to do the project, who will be the consulting and design engineers, etc., as well as cost projections.
As an example, here's an official ODOT announcement (https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/working/engineering/consultant-services/announcements/09-06-2022) on how they intended to proceed in awarding the Brent Spence Bridge Project contract.
Quote from: ITB on July 28, 2023, 02:44:58 PM
Quote from: TempoNick on July 28, 2023, 02:01:38 PM
Quote from: ITB on July 27, 2023, 08:50:46 PM
A Walsh Construction (https://www.walshgroup.com/) and Kokosing Construction (https://www.kokosing.biz/) joint venture, named the Walsh Kokosing Design-Build Team, has been selected as the design-build contractor for the Brent Spence Bridge corridor project. According to ENR (https://www.enr.com/), it's a $3.1 billion contract award. Both Kokosing and Walsh are Midwest based, with Kokosing located in Westerville, Ohio, and Walsh in Chicago.
Read more about this major contract award here (https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2023/07/27/governors-announce-contracting-team-for-brent-spence-bridge-project/70481033007/), here (https://www.enr.com/articles/56851-walsh-kokosing-jv-wins-31b-ohio-kentucky-bridge-contract), and here (https://www.fox19.com/2023/07/27/beshear-dewine-provide-brent-spence-bridge-corridor-updates/).
I understand from the Ohio side of things, but I figure Kokosing must have greased a lot of palms in Kentucky to get that job. How does Walsh fit in? Are they some kind of preferred contractor in Kentucky like Kokosing is in Ohio?
Both Walsh and Kokosing are major contractors who have expertise and experience to tackle a major project like the Brent Spence Bridge Project. Neither company is a preferred contractor for a particular state or area. First and foremost is the ability to do the contracted job. And with the Brent Spence Bridge Project, the number of companies that can "do" the job, build that bridge, is not particularly large. Far from it. There's probably only 20 to 30 companies nationwide that have the ability to take on such a large project.
Because the Spence Bridge Project is such a major undertaking, Walsh and Kokosing decided to team up to form a joint venture. It's a plus Kokosing is located in Ohio, but if they had been headquartered in Tennessee or Kentucky, it would have made no difference in the contract award. Again, it's the expertise and experience of Walsh and Kokosing that led to the contract award. Typically, way before a contract is awarded, there's a step in the process called the RFQ (Request for Qualifications) in which companies have to put forward documentation to prove they have the ability to do the job. After that, often there's the RFP (Request for Proposals), where companies put forward how the intend to do the project, who will be the consulting and design engineers, etc., as well as cost projections.
As an example, here's an official ODOT announcement (https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/working/engineering/consultant-services/announcements/09-06-2022) on how they intended to proceed in awarding the Brent Spence Bridge Project contract.
All I know is what I see, and most of the jobs here in Ohio, at least in this part of the state, are either Kokosing or Shelly and Sands. Both Ohio companies. I know what official policy is, but I'm skeptical that they don't get all these jobs because they are Ohio companies and they are preferred. Nothing wrong with that by the way, I like keeping money in state. Walsh is what surprises me.
Quote from: TempoNick on July 29, 2023, 01:10:18 PM
Quote from: ITB on July 28, 2023, 02:44:58 PM
Quote from: TempoNick on July 28, 2023, 02:01:38 PM
Quote from: ITB on July 27, 2023, 08:50:46 PM
A Walsh Construction (https://www.walshgroup.com/) and Kokosing Construction (https://www.kokosing.biz/) joint venture, named the Walsh Kokosing Design-Build Team, has been selected as the design-build contractor for the Brent Spence Bridge corridor project. According to ENR (https://www.enr.com/), it's a $3.1 billion contract award. Both Kokosing and Walsh are Midwest based, with Kokosing located in Westerville, Ohio, and Walsh in Chicago.
Read more about this major contract award here (https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2023/07/27/governors-announce-contracting-team-for-brent-spence-bridge-project/70481033007/), here (https://www.enr.com/articles/56851-walsh-kokosing-jv-wins-31b-ohio-kentucky-bridge-contract), and here (https://www.fox19.com/2023/07/27/beshear-dewine-provide-brent-spence-bridge-corridor-updates/).
I understand from the Ohio side of things, but I figure Kokosing must have greased a lot of palms in Kentucky to get that job. How does Walsh fit in? Are they some kind of preferred contractor in Kentucky like Kokosing is in Ohio?
Both Walsh and Kokosing are major contractors who have expertise and experience to tackle a major project like the Brent Spence Bridge Project. Neither company is a preferred contractor for a particular state or area. First and foremost is the ability to do the contracted job. And with the Brent Spence Bridge Project, the number of companies that can "do" the job, build that bridge, is not particularly large. Far from it. There's probably only 20 to 30 companies nationwide that have the ability to take on such a large project.
Because the Spence Bridge Project is such a major undertaking, Walsh and Kokosing decided to team up to form a joint venture. It's a plus Kokosing is located in Ohio, but if they had been headquartered in Tennessee or Kentucky, it would have made no difference in the contract award. Again, it's the expertise and experience of Walsh and Kokosing that led to the contract award. Typically, way before a contract is awarded, there's a step in the process called the RFQ (Request for Qualifications) in which companies have to put forward documentation to prove they have the ability to do the job. After that, often there's the RFP (Request for Proposals), where companies put forward how the intend to do the project, who will be the consulting and design engineers, etc., as well as cost projections.
As an example, here's an official ODOT announcement (https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/working/engineering/consultant-services/announcements/09-06-2022) on how they intended to proceed in awarding the Brent Spence Bridge Project contract.
All I know is what I see, and most of the jobs here in Ohio, at least in this part of the state, are either Kokosing or Shelly and Sands. Both Ohio companies. I know what official policy is, but I'm skeptical that they don't get all these jobs because they are Ohio companies and they are preferred. Nothing wrong with that by the way, I like keeping money in state. Walsh is what surprises me.
Walsh Construction shouldn't be a surprise. It's Chicago-based and has extensive expertise and experience building major bridges. According to its website, the company is ranked by
Engineering News-Record as the largest bridge builder in the United States (https://www.walshgroup.com/ourexperience/transportation/bridges.html).
Kokosing is Ohio's largest construction contractor. They do a lot of road and bridge projects in Ohio and in neighboring states. That's why you see their signs a lot. In Indiana, for example, Kokosing built a major bridge (https://www.kokosing.biz/projects/i-69-patoka-river-bridge/) over wetlands and the Patoka River as part of the I-69 corridor project. They were also tapped for the emergency repairs (https://www.knoxpages.com/2021/01/08/assigned-to-urgent-brent-spence-bridge-repair-project-kokosing-construction-delivers/) on the Brent Spence Bridge after the crash and fire.
It's possible the Brent Spence Bridge Project was just a little too big for Kokosing to tackle alone. But, by joining with Walsh, a very strong, experienced, well capitalized team was formed. And, in the end, it's probably best for all parties involved, particularly the states of Ohio and Kentucky who want this bridge built, and, more importantly, built right.
Kokosing has been winning more competitive bid projects in Kentucky recently. Of course a design-build partnership is a little different than a competitively-bid construction job, but I wouldn't read any shady dealings into this. Who knows what other joint ventures submitted a proposal for this design-build?
Quote from: hbelkins on July 31, 2023, 11:37:56 AM
Kokosing has been winning more competitive bid projects in Kentucky recently. Of course a design-build partnership is a little different than a competitively-bid construction job, but I wouldn't read any shady dealings into this. Who knows what other joint ventures submitted a proposal for this design-build?
I'm not necessarily saying that it's shady, but some money always goes around in campaign contributions. That's the way the system works.
Walsh seams to be doing a good job getting I-69 completed to Indianapolis
SM-G996U
Anybody has to be better than Blythe Construction, the Charlotte firm that gets most of the big contracts in the Carolinas. They seem to completely botch anything they touch in SC, especially the I-85 widening fiasco that's still ongoing north of Spartanburg.
TIL that Atlanta-based Archer Western, another firm that gets large project contracts in the Carolinas (and messes them up), is a wholly owned subsidiary of Walsh. Hopefully Walsh won't use any Archer Western resources on the Brent Spence project.
https://www.wlwt.com/article/brent-spence-companion-bridge-project-interstate/46245898 (https://www.wlwt.com/article/brent-spence-companion-bridge-project-interstate/46245898)
Proposed Brent Spence "split" announcement.
So I actually like the local/express concept, however the Ohio side
uh....
(https://i.ibb.co/M1bnwCW/Brent-Spence-Terminus.jpg) (https://ibb.co/M1bnwCW)
https://youtu.be/Z8Y_XbIv_9c
Estimated full completion of this project: 2031
Quote from: KelleyCook on December 29, 2023, 06:32:33 PM
So I actually like the local/express concept, however the Ohio side
uh....
(https://i.ibb.co/M1bnwCW/Brent-Spence-Terminus.jpg) (https://ibb.co/M1bnwCW)
https://youtu.be/Z8Y_XbIv_9c
I'm not a fan of the Ohio side. The city has pleaded with ODOT for as long as this proposal has been alive to narrow the footprint. There have been identified areas where the footprint could be substantially reduced and caps potentially installed (as a separate project). Given Queensgate East is one area that is prime for redevelopment, setting the stage for enhanced connectivity would be ideal.
I don't see the problem with the proposal. It looks great.
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on December 31, 2023, 12:12:19 AM
I don't see the problem with the proposal. It looks great.
It looks like on the Ohio side, it will be taking up quite a bit of valuable real estate, and will initially work to further divide the area that I-75 bisects. If they come back and cover it up later, these issues will be somewhat mitigated.
One thing is for certain: the construction phase will be pure hell. They need to emphasize using all of 275 as alternate routes for all non-Cincinnati-bound traffic, regardless of how far out of the way it can be. A few days ago, Control City Freak released a YouTube video about I-275, and pointed out that much of it has no control cities. In Kentucky, at the 71/75/275 stack, they should bite the bullet and sign the 275 outer loop for Columbus and Dayton, and the inner loop for Indianapolis. And make similar signage at the 71 and 75 interchanges with 275 in Ohio, with Louisville and Lexington as the control cities for the inner loop, and I think they already have Indianapolis signed for the outer loop due to its brief duplex with 74. Either way, get as much traffic out of that work zone as humanly possible.
Correct - I haven't had much of an issue with the Interstate 75 reconstruction and widening north of the bridge mainly because it utilizes the existing right-of-way. It would be nice to correct decades of wrong when the city and state divided and destroyed the Kenyon-Barr neighborhood (then home to nearly 26,000 people) for an expressway and commercial/industrial park, but that time is long gone. How we can mitigate the effects of the highway is more important as the highway isn't going away.
Quote from: wriddle082 on December 31, 2023, 12:51:54 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on December 31, 2023, 12:12:19 AM
I don't see the problem with the proposal. It looks great.
It looks like on the Ohio side, it will be taking up quite a bit of valuable real estate, and will initially work to further divide the area that I-75 bisects. If they come back and cover it up later, these issues will be somewhat mitigated.
One thing is for certain: the construction phase will be pure hell. They need to emphasize using all of 275 as alternate routes for all non-Cincinnati-bound traffic, regardless of how far out of the way it can be. A few days ago, Control City Freak released a YouTube video about I-275, and pointed out that much of it has no control cities. In Kentucky, at the 71/75/275 stack, they should bite the bullet and sign the 275 outer loop for Columbus and Dayton, and the inner loop for Indianapolis. And make similar signage at the 71 and 75 interchanges with 275 in Ohio, with Louisville and Lexington as the control cities for the inner loop, and I think they already have Indianapolis signed for the outer loop due to its brief duplex with 74. Either way, get as much traffic out of that work zone as humanly possible.
Oh I never thought about the fact that 275 doesn't have control cities. That's not helping Cincinnati's inward-facing reputation at all.
Quote from: GCrites80s on December 31, 2023, 12:18:45 PM
Quote from: wriddle082 on December 31, 2023, 12:51:54 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on December 31, 2023, 12:12:19 AM
I don't see the problem with the proposal. It looks great.
It looks like on the Ohio side, it will be taking up quite a bit of valuable real estate, and will initially work to further divide the area that I-75 bisects. If they come back and cover it up later, these issues will be somewhat mitigated.
One thing is for certain: the construction phase will be pure hell. They need to emphasize using all of 275 as alternate routes for all non-Cincinnati-bound traffic, regardless of how far out of the way it can be. A few days ago, Control City Freak released a YouTube video about I-275, and pointed out that much of it has no control cities. In Kentucky, at the 71/75/275 stack, they should bite the bullet and sign the 275 outer loop for Columbus and Dayton, and the inner loop for Indianapolis. And make similar signage at the 71 and 75 interchanges with 275 in Ohio, with Louisville and Lexington as the control cities for the inner loop, and I think they already have Indianapolis signed for the outer loop due to its brief duplex with 74. Either way, get as much traffic out of that work zone as humanly possible.
Oh I never thought about the fact that 275 doesn't have control cities. That's not helping Cincinnati's inward-facing reputation at all.
I haven't looked at all the project specifics, but just how much "real" life does the current Brent Spence have left before it will need to be replaced altogether? I thought I heard that there is only so much they can do before having to talk unavoidable replacement?
If that's the case, then one would think they would need to plan now for future ramps, ROW's and roadway tie-ins to the new sister bridge when the original bridge is replaced and/or closed.
The existing 1963 Brent Spence Bridge will be rehabilitated when the new companion structure opens around 2029, and it is expected that the structure will serve traffic for another 30 to 50 years with just regular maintenance before another rehabilitation is needed.
Quote from: thenetwork on December 31, 2023, 12:47:43 PM
I haven't looked at all the project specifics, but just how much "real" life does the current Brent Spence have left before it will need to be replaced altogether? I thought I heard that there is only so much they can do before having to talk unavoidable replacement?
If that's the case, then one would think they would need to plan now for future ramps, ROW's and roadway tie-ins to the new sister bridge when the original bridge is replaced and/or closed.
It's a common misconception that the Brent Spence is in danger of collapsing into the Ohio River. Its issue is functional obsolescence, not structural deficiency. The bridge had pretty extensive work done when the truck fire occurred several months ago.
The plan for the older c. 1932 US 41 bridge in Henderson KY over the Ohio River will keep it in operation for over 130 years with just regular maintenance. It's not unfathomable that the state could get 150+ years out of it.
So I-75 is going to be Cincinnati's Carmageddon in the next several years. With the Mill Creek Expressway project also about to begin to the bridge's immediate north, expect a big mess on the other freeways as well as motorists will struggle to get around the two construction sites (about 20 miles' worth, IIRC, and that includes the stretch across the river in Covington).
When the Brent Spence bridge is being replaced where the heck would the detour be ?
Quote from: doglover44 on January 20, 2024, 02:46:44 AM
When the Brent Spence bridge is being replaced where the heck would the detour be ?
They are going to be building a new double-decker bridge west of the existing bridge for thru traffic. After the new bridge opens to traffic, the existing bridge will be massively rehabbed and restriped to carry local traffic.